Certainly possible... It is shocking how recent the notion that historic artifacts should be viewed as objectively as possible instead of putting them in the context we want it to look like really is... At first, archaeology was merely digging things up and presenting them in a sort of "Look what I found. It's old."-fashion. Then it was often used either as "proof" how uncivilized or civilized one of the past inhabitants of wherever you were digging were, depending on if you were their decendants or not. A lot of artifacts got mixed up and assigned to completely different eras this way. Basically, people went out having a set picture in mind they were trying to find evidence for. Whatever they found that fit that picture they attributed to it and what didn't fit they classified as "unimportant" or worse destroyed. You cannot imagine the amount of work that went and still goes into the process of re-evaluating archived texts, pictures, and artifacts and trying to seperate history from story. It goes so far that there are historians nowadays who focus all their work on the history of history and how our understanding of the past formed and changed.
If you're interested in this sort of thing I can suggest the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs (which are completely inaccurate statues of what dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals looked like that are now themselves historic artifacts that tell us about how people in the mid 19th century thought about prehistoric animals) or the myth of the "germanic people" perpetuated by German nationalists from the late 19th century and through Nazi Germany (which, unfortunately, still seems to be stuck in everybody's heads... the idea that there was this one German people as far back as the stone age - tall, handsome, blonde, blue-eyed worriors who basically lived in all of central and northern Europe - which was used to justify that the German people of the time should "take back their land" and eliminate any other races that ruined their pure heritage. I don't know how much of this you'll be able to find in English, as I haven't really found translations when I looked just now. It is a fairly new field of study, afterall... But for a similar example of biased "history", although to a lesser extend, you could probably look at the Vikings and how they were usually described from the outside - by the English, for example - and how much of that we now know to be "utter bollocks".) whichever period is of more interest to you.
