Is there an Elementary Theory of the Category of Groups? I am aware that the category of categories and category of sets has been axiomatized. Is there such an axiomatization of the category of groups? (and am I correct in thinking "axiomatization of the category of groups" and "elementary theory of the category of groups" refer to the same thing?)
 A: Yes : see this paper (in French) by Pierre Leroux.
I'm not very familiar with the paper, but the main result is that a category $\mathcal{C}$ is equivalent to the category of groups if and only if :


*

*It is complete, cocomplete and pointed.

*There exists an object $G$ that is a regular projective generator.

*This object is also a co-group, i.e. a group object in $\mathcal{C}^{op}$.

*The full subcategory of $\mathcal{C}$ whose objects are the sums of isomorphic copies of $G$ is generated as a category with coproducts by the comultiplication $G\to G+G$, the inverse $G\to G$ and the zero map $G\to 0$.

*Every prenormal subobject (i.e. an object that is the equivalence class of $0$ for an internal equivalence relation) is normal (i.e. a kernel).

*Every subobject of a free object is free (where a free object is one that is isomorphic to $E\cdot G$ for some set $E$).

*Every object is a subobject of a simple object (where a simple object is an object without non-trivial normal subobjects).


The first 4 conditions are condensed in the paper by saying that $(\mathcal{C},G)$ is a "projective category of groups" ("catégorie projective de groupes").
To summarize the proof : the first 4 conditions are equivalent to the fact that $\mathcal{C}$ is equivalent to a subcategory $\mathcal{G}$ of $\mathbf{Grp}$ closed under subobject and products. The fifth one implies $\mathcal{G}$ is also closed under quotients, and is thus a subvariety of the variety of groups. The only subvarieties where every subobject of a free object is free (these are called Schreier varieties) are the variety of abelian groups and the varieties of abelian groups of exponent $p$ for $p$ prime, and these do not have the seventh property because they have only $0$ or $1$ simple object (depending on the case).
A: Not only has it been axiomatized but Zlil Sela did some brilliant work in the area.
