I am interested in published articles, and also more informal writing (blog posts, talk slides etc.) which discuss the importance of textbooks (where this word encompasses research monographs etc.) in the long-term health of a sub-discipline in Mathematics.

**Motivation:**
I have been thinking of late about how *large* Mathematics is getting (compared to, say, 50-60 years ago) with many more mathematicians and many more published papers. It also seems to me that at least some areas are becoming increasingly technical.

Furthermore, it can be very hard to follow a field by just reading the original papers: there can be false steps, or incomplete results, which only reach final form after some attempts. Often the pressures of space mean that motivation, or background material, is omitted in articles.

A good textbook can solve all of these problems. It seems to me that especially graduate students, or more established mathematicians seeking to move field, or use results of a different field to their own, face these sorts of problems in the extreme. By contrast, people working in the field probably carry around a lot of the "missing content" in their heads. This then makes me wonder if the lack of textbooks might lead to an ever increasing barrier to entry, and perhaps to sub-disciplines dying out as younger/newer mathematicians do not take up the study.

Hence my question of whether these thoughts have been stated in a longer, more thought out way before.

routine calculation that follows logically from the definitions.(I seem to recall that some of this is outlined in a section of the Kostrikin--Manin book that you refer to.) $\endgroup$4more comments