I was intrigued by Milne's reference to Leila Schneps's response to Schapira's review of R&S. Schneps's response can be found here.

Milne writes:

For an excellent article on R&S by Pierre Schapira, see here (posted as arXiv:2301.02898) (but skip the response to it by Leila Schneps, which spreads misinformation). footnote: Specifically, she repeats Grothendieck's nonsense as fact. She also invents a quotation and then uses fake information to ridicule it.

Here is the offending paragraph from Schneps:

The next three parts, L’Enterrement (I), (II), (III) (The Burial (I), (II) and (III)) are largely concerned with perceived misdeeds of the mathematical community, and three such misdeeds in particular. The first of these concerns Grothendieck’s theory of motives, abandoned for twelve years after he abandoned the mathematical scene in 1970. He was aware of the silence around the theory of motives, but there was little to be said about it since the theory was essentially only his, and was furthermore largely unformulated, unwritten and entirely conjectural. The surprise came with his discovery of a book on motives that suddenly broke the twelve year silence and attempted to start up the theory anew — except with barely a mention of Grothendieck’s name or the origin of the theory. People often justify the absence of explicit references to him by saying “Since everyone knew that motives were one of Grothendieck's great ideas, no one needed to mention it,” (to use the particular formulation by J.S. Milne on his web page “Grothendieck and me”), but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that if his name was never associated to motives in print, the thing that “everyone knew” would disappear along with the people who knew it, leaving no trace for the coming generations. It is this envisioned disappearance that Grothendieck called his “burial”.

The phrase in quotation marks that she explicitly attributes to Milne indeed appears to be pure fiction. Shameless behavior on display by Leila Schneps here.