So apparently Collot might not have been directly responsible for massacring the citizens of Lyon with a grapeshot
of course, who else
Woah… I even if they weren’t physically at the shootings but they still ordered them and took credit for them
Collot was clearly responsible for shooting and guillotining hundreds in Lyon, but we mostly talk about the use of grapeshot, and if we were to trust this book (which quite proves it) Collot might not have been present while the use of artillery was discussed, and not only executed. Wild to read about it, given that it’s the thing most often mentioned with Collot in Lyons
Holy shit
The shootings started on December 4 and Collot left Lyon on December 14. I find it hard to believe that he wouldn’t know about them. The biography of Fouché I have atm says Collot came back to Paris “pour défendre leur politique devant le Comité de salut public et la Convention”, it could be interesting to see what he told them.
However it’s true that Fouché pushed the blame on Collot as much as he could, and is probably responsible for the myth that Collot attended the massacres, which neither of them did.
Oh, it’s likely that he knew. There is, however, also some possibility that he didn’t, there were four representatives to decide it after all and not only Collot. It still would be weird if he didn’t hear a thing about artillery use, but the fact that the thing he’s always blamed for most is the least likely among everything that haplened in lyon…
I found this in Collot’s defense (i’m not sure how honest he is here):
The appalling details of the first military execution cannot be blamed in good faith on the representatives.
Isn’t it absurd to suggest they could or should have meddled? They gave strict orders to prevent something like this from happening; they strongly expressed their disapproval: that’s all they could do.
