For us to explain the importance of families in asimple yet informative way, lets take a look at a major historical figure: acertain general named Napoleon Bonaparte. Napoleon serves us very well toexplain some situations that would seem like extremely contradictory to anyonewho doesnt about his complicated history during a time of intense changes. Napoleon came from Corsica, arelatively small island that had being incorporated with France not very long prior from Italy, so, the majority of the island still saw the Italian Cultureas a guide to follow in their own lives. Napoleon Bonaparte was from the minornobility of Italy. His true name or first given name was Napoleonedi Buonaparte. His primary language was Italian and at the beginning heonly spoke French with a terrible accent when he was sent to Marseille to a School of Army Officers[1], a career that was seen as the closest possible to being a prince by the Florentine Niccolo Machiavelli[2],who dreamed about Italy being unified someday. After some time having arrived inmainland France, Napoleon changed his name to Napoleon Bonaparte to assimilatehimself better with the French Culture. A friend of mine, the young writer Fernando Souza claims that he joined afreemasonry lodge in the Egyptiantradition[3].Could it be? I dont know. But if it is true, that could explain partially hisexpedition to Egypt against theBritish. France, since it is known by thatname, was and is a melting pot and not a Nation State like Germany for example.Being so, that is why in the German language; France is called Frankreich French Kingdom or Kingdomof the Franks . However, that is not the main objective of this essay but toexplain the concept of families and dynasties royal families in a simpleand understandable way. Because later Napoleon would be elected emperor, emperor of the French. Napoleon had an enormous problemwhen he became emperor his wife and confident, Josephine, had become sterile, and he did not have a legitimate successor for the new dynasty that he hadforged for his family, Bonaparte. An emperor without a successor is extremelyvulnerable, because one single successfulassassination attempt can destroy his entire lifes work. Napoleon Ier the first hadalso another very important problem. He was being advised by Talleyrand, a snake of the worst sort,who only worked for his own interests and also Fouche, who wasnt muchdifferent. Being someone of culture, precision and courage, a master in the artof psychological warfare and also having a good diplomatic theory[4],Bonaparte also had an explosive temperament , sometimes getting mad and shaminga considerable amount of other people, many of whom would later become enemies. Further down the line, Napoleons nephew, Napoleon III or Louis Napoleon, also failed to keep thedynasty alive. That buried forever any chance of the Bonapartists to maintain aFrench Empire. If they werecontemporaneous, the Bonaparte dynasty would have been invincible becauseNapoleon III was a master in diplomacybut didnt have a third of the battle experience of his predecessor. Thiscurious comparison was very well explored in the book How to Win Friends and Influence People by Dale Carnegie.Napoleon IIINapoleon Bonaparte did a lot to construct the French