In 1513, Niccolo Machiavelli wrote a piece of work called, The Prince. It was written to all principalities, and that which is parallel to what Machiavelli suggests is often referred to as being Machiavellian. The purpose of this essay is to ask the question Is Napoleon Bonaparte Machiavellian in Nature? By the evidence found from Napoleon's life and accomplishments it can said that he was not Machiavellian in nature, which can be demonstrated by numerous accounts as well as some suggested characteristics given by Machiavelli, to support this theory. This essay will take a look at Napoleon's leadership skills, his beliefs and ideals, as well as his personality that made him a great political figure. These aspects of Napoleon's persona give a description of how his character was different from that in Machiavelli's The Prince. In the area of leadership, Napoleon had many qualities that set him apart from the rest. Napoleon was a great leader but at times his people hated him. Machiavelli believed that, … one cannot call it virtue to kill one's citizens, betray one's friends, to he without faith, without mercy, without religion; these modes can enable one to acquire an empire, but not glory. Napoleon's goal was to seize power for himself, and the cry's of his people were drowned out for his own pursuit of power. Napoleon sought after glorification for himself, an example of this is when Napoleon was first exiled he returned to France and betrayed his country just so he could gain back his power, although he did not succeed. Another example of his leadership and how it is different from being Machiavellian is how his whole life he had no friends and how he was never close to his subjects. Machiavelli said, It remains now to see what the modes and government of a prince should be with subjects and with friends. Apparently Napoleon was not a good friend considering when he was exiled the second time his friends that had been with him since the beginning were said to...