The Mission of Betrayal: Shepherd Wolves, Red Herrings and Poisoned Meatballs, 4

We now know about survival, economy, economics, money and other means of credit, payment and exchange, and about their relationships and seniority. And compared to such characters we are laypersons. Consequently we could legitimately expect them to have full mastery with such basics; much more than us. And expect them to communicate and act accordingly. Ideally.

Go and inspect.
You may just want to ask them only one question: “Are you plain dumb or playing dumb?” And you may get the idea that betrayal is a mission to them. And you may hit the mark.
Or you may discover that you now know more than them. It’s not a matter of putting on airs, not for a moment; we’re here to get somewhere. Just go and inspect if you can find somewhere else in the mainstream vulgate what you’ve got here, complete, explained, and connected.

Here the concept of relative importances comes in handy: things, data, etc. are more or less important with regards to one another and to a purpose, hence ought to be treated accordingly.
When someone object that some pieces of the puzzle already surfaced somewhere, the answer, as it has been said, is that they surfaced in the middle of lots of other items, and if they were aware of their relative importances then, they would most definitely underline them with the blue pencil and set the rest aside.
Here you can directly apply relative importances as a yardstick: not only you now know about production, exchange, means of credit, payment and exchange, and moneypulation; you now know as well that these are the basics. So go and inspect those characters as to their position with regards not only to these basics but to their relative importance as well. And be well prepared to face vacuums, as that’s what you’re most likely to find.
“Are you plain dumb or playing dumb? That is the question.”