A general thought on Masechet Gittin

It's been a long time since i learnt Masechet Gittin, and even now I just got up to the first few pages, but I was always bothered by the organization of the masechta. Why in the world should it begin with the seemingly trivial halachot of שליח ממדינת הים צריך שיאמר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם and not start with the more fundamental concepts of גט such as for example whether עדי מסירה או עדי חתימה כרתי (which equally baffling is placed only at the last perek if memory serves me correctly). It's completely backwards!

So these are the lines along which i'm thinking: Given that everything can be placed along a spectrum between intrinsic existential being (הויה)  versus the manifestation of that being and how it is perceived and related to by the external world, even by the most distant and far removed from it, otherwise known as שם, a name by which the person is called by the external world. And being that the former is a male dimension whereas the latter concept of שם is a female one. And being that מסכת גיטין is dealing in a feminine world of divorcing a woman  --- it then can make sense possibly that the masechta will go in opposite direction i.e. starting at the furthest outpost of שם and working its way to the intrinsic essence of being.

So we begin with the most removed scenario of גט possible -- ממדינת הים, with no husband in sight but only a שליח, and not even עדי הגט  in front of us, and we discuss to what degree and it what circumstances does this removed גט impact us. Only at the end of the masechta will we discuss the fundamental question of what a גט  is intrinsically in and of itself.

Just a proposal at this point. i haven't learnt enough of the masechta to know if it holds water.