Ok, so once again confirmation that there is no provenance, but now it’s all the mean old Muslims’ and Protestants’ fault. That you are so willing to lump Protestants with Muslims is telling. They do both discourage idolatry, but wow.... As for Mr. Twain, I do not view him as a particular “authority” on this issue any more than the relic peddlers. His comment is a humorous example of what has been well known for centuries—that many so-called “relics” are baseless and likely frauds. People can go venerate whatever corpses and parts of corpses they wish, whomever they may actually have been. Why the presence of unknown dusty bones builds any more faith than the utter absence of the most important set of bones, I have no idea. I asked a question and in a round about fashion have come to the answer I first suspected: There is no hard evidence of the authenticity of the relics. Believers in relics and their power take it on faith. Ok, fair enough.
No that was not the answer you received. Sometimes there is evidence because there is a chain of custody. Sometimes there isn't. Sometimes the same (ideologically) people who don't understand the veneration of relics are those who destroyed the evidence that had been available. To cynically mix up these three while not acknowledging the immense fault of the so-called Reformation in all of this is morally repugnant and characteristic of Protestant charlatans. Don't be one of them.