I haven't read any books specifically on this topic, but it's a fairly common thing in non-academic (and sometimes academic) discussions of history. There's a subreddit, http://reddit.com/r/badhistory, that spends a lot of time picking apart bad historical arguments from around the web. Just as often as not, I'd say, the issue with the history is just as much trying to apply modern morality and societal norms to a culture completely removed from the modern day as it is factual inaccuracies.
It's not exactly a rigorous explanation of the phenomenon, but it is a good set of case studies.
Also, it should be noted that using modern concepts in a historical setting is not always "wrong" or "bad history". It's pretty clear the author of this article chose to describe Grosseteste the way they did to simplify his work for a broader audience.
It's not exactly a rigorous explanation of the phenomenon, but it is a good set of case studies.
Also, it should be noted that using modern concepts in a historical setting is not always "wrong" or "bad history". It's pretty clear the author of this article chose to describe Grosseteste the way they did to simplify his work for a broader audience.