Artscroll will usually discuss the meaning of a strange word if it is mentioned by Rashi, Arukh etc. while R. Steinsaltz will mention Greek and other sources for words. Rabbi Wein skirts this issue in terms of history. Thus, for example, he brings down in great detail the story from Ravad I about the four captives and their trip from Babylonia to establishing Torah in Europe. He hints that there are problems with this story but leaves it at that. In fact there are Genizah letters that cast doubt on details of the story.
Similar controversies occur in other areas of history where it is the rabbis versus the historians.
Thus for example, several years ago a document was found apparently written by Rav Yehuda haChasid that indicated that some verses in the Torah were not from Moshe Rabbenu. Rav Moshe Feinstein paskened that this could not have been written by a Rav Yehudah haChasid. Few historians would accept the view that Eliezer haKalir was a Tannah even though that is stated by many rishonim. In terms of the controversy between Rav Yonasan Eibshutz and Rav Yaakov Emden, I was told by a religious historian that most rabbis accept the version of Rav Eibshutz while most historians agrre with Rav Emden. So in the end truth is in the eye of the beholder.