Peace Original Muslim,
Thank you for your good questions. There is a lot of "historical" information about the prophet that contradicts physical archeological evidence.
Quote from: "Original Muslim"Besides getting from historical point of view, can we investigate this man not only from archaeological point of view, but also from scientific process, such as DNA or forensic science. We can get extract from his belongings such as his sword etc.
We can't. We don't have any belongings and even if we did, it is very difficult if not impossible to trace them specifically to the prophet. Moreover, what purpose would such a study accomplish? Nothing.
Quote from: "Original Muslim"Who is Abu Jahal a mentioned in Quran, how about Abu Bakar, Umar, Ali, Hussein ? Are they from Jordan also ?
I am not sure about Jordan. Let's say Northern Arabia (which includes Jordan and parts of Syria and Iraq).
Quote from: "Original Muslim"Can we investigate history of Abrahah who want to conqueor Kaabah (location ?) as stated in Surah Al-Fil ?
We can investigate the history of Abraha because in this case we are fortunate to have physical archeological evidence in the form of a very detailed inscription written to commemorate his expedition.
The Abraha inscription is an example of the kind of archeological evidence that provides information that totally contradicts the official view of history. The fact is that unlike what many people have been told and led to believe, the Abraha inscription mentions many things but it does not mention or even allude to anything about so-called Kaaba or Makka.
You can see the inscription of Abraha at:
http://www.mnh.si.edu/epigraphy/e_pre-islamic/fig04_sabaean_img.htm
Translation:
"With the power of the Almighty, and His Messiah King Abraha Zeebman, the King of Saba'a, Zuridan, and Hadrmaut and Yemen and the tribes (on) the mountains and the coast wrote these lines on his battle against the tribe of Ma'ad (in) the battle of al-Rabiya in the month of "Dhu al Thabithan" and fought all of Bani A'amir and appointed the King Abi Jabar with Kinda and Al, Bishar bin Hasan with Sa'ad, Murad, and Hadarmaut in front of the army against Bani Amir of Kinda. and Al in Zu Markh valley and Murad and Sa'ad in Manha valley on the way to Turban and killed and captured and took the booty in large quantities and the King and fought at Halban and reached Ma'ad and took booty and prisoners, and after that, conquered Omro bin al-Munzir.
(Abraha) appointed the son (of Omro) as the ruler and returned from Hal Ban (halban) with the power of the Almighty in the month of Zu A'allan in the year sixty-two and six hundred."As one can clearly see, the Abraha expedition is described in detail and contrary to the fairy tales that we heard from Ibn Is7aq and traditionalists there is absolutely no mention of anything related to Kaaba or Makka.
The inscription doesn't mention elephants. Given the fact is that it would have been highly impractical to bring elephants into the desert and carry their weight in water, I would say that Abraha did not use elephants. Moreover, elephants had fallen out of use as battle gear approximately seven centuries earlier. This is for the simple reason that elephants' feet are very sensitive and it is very easy to defeat elephants in battle by placing thorns or any sharp objects in their path. Elephants would have suffered greatly in the scorching sands of the desert without giving an invading army any advantage.
Chapter 105 of the great reading doesn't say anything about Kaaba, Makka, or Abraha. In light of verses such as 11:82 and 15:74 that talk about the punishment of the people of Lot as being hit by "7ijarat min sijjil", the same exact term in chapter 105, the chapter is more likely to be referring to the people of Lot and not Abraha.
Another interesting fact that is confirmed by the great reading is that the southern Arabs at the time of the prophet used to call The God "Al-Rahman". The sign in 17:110 is in perfect agreement with the archeological evidence. We can now see that the opening of "Bism Allah Al-Rahman Al-Rahim" and the whole honorable reading was addressing both Northern and Southern Arabs and not just one tribe or the other.
In addition, there are also other interesting linguistic implications to how people living during "pre-quranic" times understood the language of the great quran. The term Al-Rahman is often interpreted in classical Arabic dictionaries to mean "Gracious" or "Beneficent". This is not in line with how the attribute is used in the great reading, where for example, in 19:45 we hear prophet Ibrahim say to his father, a rejecting idol-worshipper, "I fear you would be struck with the wrath of Al-Rahman." The word Al-Rahman in 19:45 is more likely to invoke fear of retribution as opposed to hope of benefit or grace. The Abraha inscription confirms the meaning of Al-Rahman as used in the great quran to mean an attribute that conveys power: The Almighty. Both physical archeological evidence (as opposed to hearsay) and the great reading are in perfect match on how people at the time of the prophet must have understood the meaning of Al-Rahman.
As you may have noticed, the story of Abraha as told in the inscription is kind of dull and with no happy ending for the Arabs. On the other hand, the hearsay tales from the likes of Ibn Is7aq are filled with amazing details, suspense, and drama. They capture people's imagination with the amazing detail of the character of an old frail man (the fictitious Abd Al-Mutilib) standing in the path of the Army of Abraha. The stories have special effects of amazing creatures (the elephants) and gore (the flesh and blood flowed like water and the skin of Abraha and his soldiers falling off and exposing the bones, etc.). These hearsay stories that the Arabs concocted two hundred years after the fact have very high entertainment value and appeal to the masses much as Hollywood flicks often do. However, they have no value for those interested in the truth. The Arabs were very proud of their forefathers as evident from the many inscriptions bearing family lineage and tribal affiliation. Thus, when they became in the seat of power, they rewrote history to turn their forefathers' humiliating defeat at the hands of Abraha into a legendary victory.
As a side note, the date on the inscription converts to 552AD. According to traditionalists accounts of the sira/story of the prophet, he was born in the year of Abraha's expedition and they say that he was born in 570AD. So this pushes back the date of birth of the prophet by about 20 years. This creates a big problem for traditionalists. They now either have to revise the entire Sira/story of the prophet or they have to give up all their Hadiths. This is for the simple reason that all the chains of transmission of their "Sahih" Hadiths will now be broken as a result of pushing back the dates by 20 years.
Peace and all best wishes,
Ayman