i autologokrimeni mnimi / η αυτολογοκριμένη μνήμη

The book is widely praised as a thorough, in-depth, and illuminating study of the security battalions during the Occupation period. Reviewers highlight its comprehensive nature, detailing the formation, composition, and actions of these groups, often drawing on testimonies from their own members. The work is commended for its meticulous documentation, featuring a rich bibliography, extensive primary and secondary sources, and continuous in-text citations that adhere to scientific historiography methodologies. It meticulously examines the post-war efforts by governments to conceal the past of these formations, their subsequent integration into the national army, and the controversial granting of ranks and pensions. The book is considered essential reading for researchers and those interested in understanding the conditions under which these groups emerged, the diverse motivations for joining them, and the complex process of historical revisionism in post-war Greece. Many appreciate its challenging perspective on established narratives and its utility for readers across the political spectrum.

Despite its strengths, several criticisms are raised regarding the book's balance and scope. Some reviewers note that the book lacks a broader contextualization of the Occupation, particularly concerning the actions of the resistance movement, which can lead to a one-dimensional understanding of the battalions' creation and the reasons for mass enlistment. Concerns are also voiced about the depth of analysis regarding the motivations of those who joined the battalions, as well as the author's treatment of arguments made in defense of these groups by nationalist historiography, which are presented without sufficient in-depth analysis or refutation. Critiques also point to the use of problematic and controversial sources, such as those by Polychronis Enepakides and Heinz Richter, whose reliability and accuracy have been questioned by other historians. Specific examples of alleged distorted presentation include the handling of Georgios Papadopoulos's purported membership in the battalions, using what some consider controversial evidence and overlooking more recent research, and a selective presentation of General Leonidas Spais's views, omitting nuances about mitigating circumstances for common members. These issues lead some critics to suggest that the book, at certain points, borders on propaganda despite its strong documentation.

In conclusion, the book is a significant and extensively researched work that delves into a sensitive and often controversial chapter of modern Greek history. It offers valuable insights into the security battalions, their operational history, and the political and historical efforts to manage their legacy in the post-war era. While its rigorous documentation and challenging perspective are widely lauded, the book also faces criticism for its perceived lack of broader context, depth in motivational analysis, and potential biases in source selection and interpretation, leading to questions about its overall objectivity. This book would primarily appeal to researchers, historians, and conscientious students of the Greek Occupation and Civil War periods. It is also well-suited for readers interested in the complexities of historical revisionism, the construction of national narratives, and those seeking a detailed, albeit potentially controversial, account of how collaborationist elements were dealt with by the post-war Greek state.