Exact Sequences and the Snake Lemma
One-line statement: An exact sequence is a sequence of objects and morphisms in an abelian category where the image of each map equals the kernel of the next; the Snake Lemma constructs a natural long exact sequence connecting the kernels and cokernels of three vertically related short exact sequences via a "connecting homomorphism." Key result in words: Given a commutative diagram of three short exact sequences stacked into two rows, the kernels and cokernels of the vertical maps splice together into a single six-term exact sequence, with the magic "snake" connecting map δ threading from the leftmost cokernel back to the rightmost kernel. Where it applies: Homological algebra, algebraic topology (long exact sequences of pairs, Mayer–Vietoris), commutative algebra, sheaf cohomology, representation theory, algebraic K-theory. Who/when: The diagrammatic methods crystallized in the 1940s–1950s (Eilenberg, Mac Lane, Cartan, Steenrod); the Snake Lemma became standard with the rise of homological algebra (Cartan–Eilenberg, 1956) and category theory.An exact sequence in an abelian category is a (possibly infinite) chain of objects connected by morphisms such that at every interior object the image of the incoming morphism coincides exactly with the kernel of the outgoing one. This single condition encodes injectivity, surjectivity, and the precise "failure of exactness" that homology measures. Exact sequences matter because they convert global structural questions—does this extension split? how do these cohomology groups relate?—into bookkeeping over maps, and because the Snake Lemma provides the universal mechanism for producing the long exact sequences that pervade topology and algebra. The surprising fact is that the connecting homomorphism δ, which appears to "jump" across the diagram from cokernels back to kernels, is canonical, natural, and entirely forced by the diagram—even though its definition requires a non-canonical choice of preimage that miraculously washes out.
The Core Insight
Exactness localizes a global property: instead of asking whether a long composite is zero, you check one balance condition (image = kernel) at each node. The Snake Lemma then says that whenever you have a 3×2 commutative grid of short exact sequences, the obstruction to "kernels mapping onto kernels and cokernels injecting into cokernels" is itself measured by a single connecting map, and the entire defect organizes into one exact sequence. Exactness is the conservation law of homological algebra, and the snake map is the current that flows when conservation is locally violated.
Formal Statement
Exact Sequence
Let be an abelian category. A sequence of objects and morphisms
is exact at if as subobjects of . The sequence is exact if it is exact at every interior object. A first consequence is that consecutive maps compose to zero:
Short Exact Sequence
A short exact sequence (SES) is an exact sequence of the form
Equivalently is a monomorphism, is an epimorphism, and induces an isomorphism . We say is an extension of by .
Kernel, Cokernel, Image in an Abelian Category
For a morphism :
The Snake Lemma
Let be an abelian category and suppose the following diagram commutes with exact rows:
Then there is a natural connecting homomorphism making the following sequence exact:
Why It Holds / Derivation
Construction of δ and Exactness — Diagram Chase in R-Mod
We work in -Mod; the general abelian-category case follows by the Freyd–Mitchell embedding theorem, which embeds any small abelian category exactly and fully faithfully into -Mod for some ring , so that element-wise chases are legitimate.
Step 1 — The induced maps exist. If , then , so ; define . Likewise . Dually, sends into (since ), so descends to ; similarly . Step 2 — Define the connecting map δ. Take . Choose with (possible since is surjective). NowThe Snake: the connecting map δ threads from ker c down across to coker a
Samuel Eilenberg & Saunders Mac Lane | 1909–1998 / 1909–2005
Eilenberg and Mac Lane founded category theory in their 1945 paper "General Theory of Natural Equivalences," precisely to make rigorous the notion of a natural transformation—exactly the kind of canonicity the connecting homomorphism δ exhibits. Eilenberg, together with Steenrod, axiomatized homology (1952) around the long exact sequence of a pair; with Cartan he wrote Homological Algebra (1956), the text in which diagram-chasing tools like the Snake Lemma and the Five Lemma became the working language of the subject. Mac Lane's Homology (1963) and Categories for the Working Mathematician (1971) standardized the abelian-category framework in which the Snake Lemma lives in full generality. Their insistence that the connecting map be functorial in the diagram—not merely existent—is what elevates the Snake Lemma from a computational trick to a structural theorem.
Building Intuition
Think of a short exact sequence as a statement that is built from a "bottom piece" and a "top piece" , with sitting inside and being what's left over. Exactness is conservation: nothing is created or destroyed as you pass along the maps; whatever dies (gets sent to zero) by is exactly what was born (lay in the image) under .
The Snake Lemma addresses a comparison: you have two such decompositions, the top row and bottom row, linked by vertical "comparison maps" . You'd love for kernels to map onto kernels and cokernels into cokernels cleanly, giving two separate short exact sequences. They almost do—but there's a gap, and the snake map δ is precisely the bridge that closes it. Operationally δ is a relay race: start with an element of , run it backwards up the right column to , run it down through the middle map to , then run it backwards up the left column to , and report the result modulo . The non-canonical "backwards" steps introduce ambiguity, but Step 3 of the proof shows the ambiguity lands exactly in , which is why we quotient by it. The miracle isn't that δ is defined—it's that this S-shaped chase produces an exact sequence with no leftover error terms.
Worked Examples
Multiplication by n on Z/m, and the connecting map
Consider, for fixed integers , the diagram of -modules with rows the SES , vertical maps "multiply by ":
- for the left and middle, so .
- : elements with , i.e. where . This subgroup has order , so .
- for left and middle, so .
- has order , so .
- The sequence [6] reads .
- Exactness at forces δ injective; trace δ: lift to (middle), apply to get , then divide by (left ) — but need not be divisible by in ... here we use that means , so and .
Recovering the long exact sequence in homology
Given. A short exact sequence of chain complexes (exact in each degree). We derive the long exact homology sequence. Steps.- For each , the differential induces a diagram comparing (top) with cycle subgroups (bottom), arising from the maps induced by the differential.
- Concretely the rows
- The connecting map δ becomes the homological boundary : lift a cycle to , apply to get which maps to in , hence comes from ; set .
Common Misconceptions
" means the sequence is exact." False. The vanishing of composites only gives (a chain complex). Exactness is the much stronger equality . The discrepancy is precisely homology; exactness means homology vanishes. "The connecting map δ is canonical so it must be defined without choices." Misleading. The construction of δ genuinely uses a choice of lift (an inverse image under a non-injective surjection). What is canonical is the output, because the ambiguity is exactly quotiented away. Confusing "choice-free definition" with "well-defined result" is a common trap. "You can chase elements in any abelian category." Not directly—a general abelian category has no underlying sets. Element-chasing is justified only via the Freyd–Mitchell embedding (for small categories) or by a more careful diagrammatic/membership-relation formalism (generalized elements). The conclusion holds, but the method needs justification.A complex that is not exact, and where the Snake hypotheses fail
Take . Here , so it is not even a complex—exactness is impossible. Even repairing to , the composite is zero but the leftmost map is not injective onto ... it is here, so this one is exact—illustrating how delicate the equality condition is.
For the Snake Lemma's hypotheses, consider dropping exactness of a row. Take rows where the bottom is with the wrong right map (say the identity rather than ), making . Then the bottom is not exact, identifications break, and the six-term sequence [6] fails to be exact at : one finds an element of not hit by δ. Exact rows are not decoration; they are load-bearing.
Connections
The Snake Lemma is the keystone joining several pillars. It specializes to the long exact sequence in Singular Homology and to the long exact sequence of Derived Functors (e.g. and ): a short exact sequence of modules induces long exact and sequences whose connecting maps are snake maps in disguise. In Sheaf Cohomology, a short exact sequence of sheaves yields the cohomology long exact sequence via the same mechanism applied to injective resolutions. The lemma is the prototype of the connecting morphism in any Triangulated Category, where distinguished triangles axiomatize "snake-like" rotation, and it underlies the Five Lemma and Nine Lemma (the lemma), which are corollaries obtained by composing snake/diagram chases. It also sits at the heart of the Spectral Sequence formalism, where the page-to-page differentials generalize δ.
Real-World Applications
- Algebraic topology — long exact sequence of a pair. Computing of spaces by relating a space, a subspace, and the quotient; the boundary map δ detects how cycles in the quotient lift to relative chains. Used to compute homology of spheres, projective spaces, CW complexes.
- Mayer–Vietoris computations. Decomposing a space into two open sets and assembling cohomology; the connecting map is a snake map for the Čech/singular complex SES. Essential in computing de Rham cohomology of manifolds.
- Number theory — Bockstein and Galois cohomology. The mod- Bockstein (Example 1) and the connecting maps in the long exact sequences of Galois cohomology (e.g. from the Kummer sequence ) drive computations of and the structure of class groups.
- Commutative algebra — depth and local cohomology. Snake/long exact sequences in local cohomology relate depth, dimension, and Cohen–Macaulayness of rings and modules.
- Representation theory. Long exact sequences classify extensions of representations and compute cohomology of groups and Lie algebras; the connecting map encodes obstruction classes.
- Algebraic K-theory. The localization long exact sequence relating -groups of a ring, a localization, and the relevant quotient category is built from connecting homomorphisms of snake type.
- Differential geometry / physics (anomalies). Descent equations and the relation between gauge anomalies in different dimensions are organized by connecting homomorphisms (Stora–Zumino), a physical avatar of δ; characteristic-class transgression is a snake-map phenomenon.
Historical Development
- 1895–1933. Poincaré's analysis situs and the work of Noether, Hopf, and Vietoris recast "Betti numbers and torsion" into homology groups, making maps between groups—and eventually exact sequences—the natural objects.
- 1941. Hurewicz and others use exact sequence reasoning implicitly; the term "exact sequence" gestates in the homotopy/homology literature.
- 1945. Eilenberg and Mac Lane publish "General Theory of Natural Equivalences," founding category theory and giving precise meaning to naturality—the property that makes δ canonical.
- 1947–1949. Kelley–Pitcher and others give the "exact sequence" its modern name and notation; the long exact sequence of a pair becomes a standard tool.
- 1952. Eilenberg and Steenrod's Foundations of Algebraic Topology axiomatizes homology, placing the long exact sequence (hence the connecting homomorphism) among the Eilenberg–Steenrod axioms.
- 1956. Cartan and Eilenberg's Homological Algebra systematizes diagram chasing; the Snake Lemma, Five Lemma, and derived functors enter the canon, with long exact sequences derived uniformly.
- 1957. Grothendieck's Tôhoku paper generalizes homological algebra to abelian categories, removing dependence on elements and setting the stage for sheaf cohomology and δ in great generality.
- 1960s. Freyd (1964