[GodGunsGuts]

Sorry, you are just plain wrong. The historical science of archeology of can be used to test the veracity of the historical descriptions of Alexander and/or his empire. Paleontology is a historical science because it attempts to reconstruct the world of the Dinos. Phylogenetics is a historical science because it attempts to reconstruct the past via phylogenetic comparisons. Cosmology is an historical science because it attempts to reconstruct how the Universe got started. Do you see the underlying them?...they all attempt to reconstruct the unobservable, unrepeatable past, as opposed to operation science which deals with observable, repeatable processes in the present.

[socialismislost]

no it can not. There is no such thing as a historical science. There is history describing science. Archeology can never be used to understand Alexandar the Great in a historical sense, and the same argument for the other sciences you have listed. Paleontology can never reconstruct the physical past as dinosaurs existed millions of years ago. You are purposefully defining history with science. If your argument was correct, paleontology would be able to reconstruct a physical dinosaur with the same conditions that it existed millions of years ago. History describes the past. Science explains it. You continue post after post to equate the two words.