Let(Eα,fβα)and(Fα,gβα)be two direct systems of sets relative to the same index set I; letE=limEα, F=limFα, and for eachα∈Iletfα (resp.gα) be the canonical mapping ofEα (resp.Fα) into E (resp. F). For eachα∈Iletuαbe a mapping ofEαintoFαsuch that, wheneverα⩽β, the diagram
Eαfβα↓⏐Eβ⟶uαuβ⟶Fα↓⏐gβαFβ
is commutative. Then there exists a unique mappingu:E→Fsuch that, for eachα∈I, the diagram
Eαfα↓⏐E⟶uαu⟶Fα↓⏐gαF
is commutative.
Put vα=gα∘uα. If α⩽β, then by (22) we have
vβ∘fβα=gβ∘uβ∘fβα=gβ∘gβα∘uα=gα∘uα=vα.
We may therefore apply Proposition 6 to the mappings vα, whence the existence and uniqueness of a mapping u:E→F such that
u∘fα=vα=gα∘uα
for all α∈I.
¶ A family of mappings uα:Eα→Fα which satisfies the conditions of Corollary 1 is called a direct system of mappings of (Eα,fβα) into (Fα,gβα). The mapping defined in Corollary 1 is called the direct limit of the family (uα) and is written u=limuα when there is no risk of ambiguity.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.