According to my research, "literally" used to mean "figuratively", or at least it was used by many people to mean "figuratively" several centuries ago. Yet, although there were some detractors, I can't place where or who officially separated "literally" and "figuratively" to how we understood it in the past few decades, and I'd like to know how it all came about.
Your research, which you have not told us about, but should have done, is wrong because of a lack of research:
The simplest way to find the origins of a word and its history is Online Etymology Dictionary
A better way is to gain access to the Oxford English Dictionary, which, for literally, gives:
1. a. In a literal, exact, or actual sense; not figuratively, allegorically, etc.
c1429 Mirour Mans Saluacioune (1986) l. 553 Litteraly haf ȝe herde this dreme and what it ment. [Literally you have heard this dream and what it meant.]
So we see that this is the earliest meaning and literally still has that meaning today.
But a few lines down, we have:
1. c. colloquial. Used to indicate that some (frequently conventional) metaphorical or hyperbolical expression is to be taken in the strongest admissible sense: ‘virtually, as good as’; (also) ‘completely, utterly, absolutely’.
Now one of the most common uses, although often considered irregular in standard English since it reverses the original sense of literally (‘not figuratively or metaphorically’).
The earliest record of this sense is
1769 F. Brooke Hist. Emily Montague IV. ccxvii. 83 He is a fortunate man to be introduced to such a party of fine women at his arrival; it is literally to feed among the lilies.
Both meanings exist side by side in current English. You should be able to tell which is which by the context.
I can't place where or who officially separated "literally" and "figuratively".
And you never will be able to. English has no "official body" that says how the language may be used or what a word may mean.
Dictionaries are merely a record of the [almost] present meaning