What holds together a monument erected at the behest of Stalin, detention and torture centers in Argentina and Cambodia, the birthplace of Mussolini, or the boots of a Nazi commander? These sites and objects are all connected, in varying ways, to the figures of perpetrators and the violence they enacted. This entry explores this topic by clarifying the terms under which we can discuss perpetrator heritage and the types of memories it can convey. This entry is structured as follows: First, I examine the relationship between perpetrators, perpetration, and heritage, outlining how these elements intertwine. Next, I focus on the concept’s spatial and material dimensions, while recognizing that perpetrator heritage can also possess an immaterial component. In doing so, I propose a typology of perpetrator heritage. Following that, I analyze four strategies typically employed in relation to perpetrator heritage: erasure, normalization, refunctionalization, and glorification. Finally, this entry concludes with a reflection on the new challenges facing the study of perpetrator heritage in current academic and societal debates.