Over the last century, America has produced two dominant and nearly opposite myths of its early explorers: the noble, courageous bringer of light and civilization to the barbarous world; and (more recently) the invader, who is greedy, violent, and sometimes even depraved. How might these very different myths of the explorer suit the different times in which the myths have flourished? Based on the excerpt from his account, how might Cabeza de Vaca be located between these opposite extremes?

In the clarification section down, the definition of the query is mentioned.

Explanation:

Christopher Columbus became quite dissimilar who generally think of him as a brave Nobel guiding enlightenment. He has always been embroidered mostly as bold as well as lighter adventurer throughout 1492, mostly on the top of a mischaracterization. A continuous stream of tragedies but instead missed opportunities followed during his fourth voyage between 1492-1504. He decided to make the relationship towards Indians unpleasant and sparked the dispute amongst them. Through the first journey of illusion, he attempted to completely overhaul his credibility and fell to pieces there. Inability and gory became his trip across the globe. John Smith would be another global citizen described as a renowned commander in people's understanding. He was indeed narcissistic, egoistic, and self-sufficient. Cabeza de vaka seems to have been, as opposed to the 2 explorers above, a self-centered guy. Instead of his exciting adventure, he received almost no local support. during his slowly drifting, he'd been jailed for 2 years, then become a healer of knowledge.

He didn't attempt to civilize foreign territories but tried instead to preserve their origins and independent individuals from inhumane treatment of slavery, In contrast to Columbus as well as a smith.