A series of six experiments compared the characteristics of hypothermia-induced amnesia for newly acquired and old reactivated memories. Old memory, when reactivated by cue exposure, was disrupted by mild or deep hypothermia treatment, while new memory was impaired only by deep cooling. Mild hypothermia had no disruptive influence on either new or old memories. Old, but not new, learning showed recovery from amnesia in a test-retest procedure. The onset of amnesia was more rapid for an old reactivated memory than for a newly acquired memory. The susceptibility of memory to disruption decreased over time following original learning or cue reactivation, although this decrease was, if anything, more rapid following the cuing procedure. Recovery from amnesia could be induced by a recooling reminder treatment and was similar for both new and old memories. It was suggested that activity of, or access to, memory rather than age per se determines susceptibility to disruption. The process of memory reactivation appears somewhat more sensitive, rapid, and brief than the processes) of memory formation. However, that the underlying old memory remains stable over time was supported by the strong retention when specific implicit or explicit reactivation cues were available.