If past historians have lowered themselves to exaggerating Quantrill's physical features in their writings, that is a curse upon them and makes their work suspect until an analysis can be done. Quantrill himself appears to have hurt is own "legacy" with his tall tales to his friends and comrades about his background. Using a man's friends and battle comrades as truthful witnesses about a man's character is dangerous.

Quantrill is not the only participant in the border war to be demonized. Ewing, Jennison, Montgomery and Lane (to name a few) have been and are. As for the Federal actions along the border being shown in only a good light, ever since a child I've read about Federal crimes:

Osceola, Butler, Morristown, the looting and plundering by Lane's Kansas Brigade in 1861/2 and other Kansas troops throughout the war, the execution of Rebels at Palmyra, Ewing's Order#11, the collapse of the jail in Kansas City, summary executions of civilians and "soldiers" by Federal troops.

Unfortunately, sir, you appear to have a bias toward one participant of the conflict along the Kansas-Missouri border similiar to that held by John N. Edwards. That is not the hallmark of a true historian, which as a fledgling
historian I am, wish to emulate. Quantrill and his like weren't the epitome of Satan, but neither were they angels. The same goes for the Federals.

P.S. As a note to your comment about Quantrill being called a devil. Actually, I believe he would have enjoyed that term for himself. As a former infantry soldier for many years and a combat vet, we nicknamed our tracks- the Reaper, 666, Lucifer, etc., etc. This was common practice for all. So the phrase 'fought like the devil' is a derogatory term?