I actually stopped reading there and went to the comments. I dont mean any disrespect, just trying to give a counterpoint: I like to have some more upfront info about an article's thesis before I invest in reading about an Italian history lesson hoping it will be relevant. I see this style a lot for example on substack, as if people are always trying to weave in a relevant historical anecdote or clever fact, which is fine, but it sets a much higher bar if the article is going to delay the build up to a point without first telling me what that point will be. It's easy to get bored along the way and bail.