A little hard to go into detail about this because I'm not asking about anything specific, just the overall development of history as a field of research.

Here's an example of the type of thing I mean, but if you can't answer these exact questions that's fine: There was an old myth that Rome was founded by two brothers, Romulus and Remus, and that they were raised by a wolf instead of their real mother. People in modern times are obviously going to doubt the wolf part, and they might say that Romulus and Remus weren't even real historical figures, but that's not the part I'm most interested in. I'd be more interested in these followup questions:

-Did people in ancient Rome literally believe the city's founders were raised by a wolf?

-Who was the first Roman to publicly doubt the story?

-Did Rome's enemies tend to believe the story or not? Are there any examples of, say, Persians writing about how Romans were idiots for having such an implausible history?

-When did people living in the city of Rome in general start to believe the story wasn't true? (I'd guess if you go to Rome today, the vast majority of people would say the story isn't true, but if you went through a time machine to Rome in say the 2nd century B.C. then most people might say it is true. When and why, exactly, did this change happen?)

-Did people in medieval times (say, in England) believe that Rome's founders were raised by a wolf?

-Did people in the 17th century believe that Rome's founders were raised by a wolf?

-Did people in the 17th century believe that people in medieval times believed that Rome's founders were raised by a wolf?

There could be similar questions about any myth or historical misconception. There could also be similar questions about the value judgements historical eras made about other historical eras and figures. For example, did people in the Weimar Republic think Julius Caesar was good or bad? Who was the first Pope to offer his opinion about Confucianism? When did people start to say that Columbus proved the Earth was round and how did this develop into the myth that everyone before Columbus thought the Earth was flat? What was the difference in how ancient Greek history was taught in the Russian Empire compared to in the Soviet Union?

To reiterate: it's not necessary to answer any of these particular questions if you don't want to. I would like them answered but I'm much more interested in learning about the general concepts. I feel that there's a gap in how history is taught and written about because it so often skips from early primary sources straight to modern understandings without much focus on how that transition happened and what mistakes were made along the way.