The current thinking on the connection between administrative law and criminal law in the field of archival crimes has problems such as a disconnection between the content of the protected interests and the concept of the objects from the pre-existing archival laws, and a lack of substantive connection in the independent criminal judgment of the system positioning and regulatory scope of the crime names. Under the unity of the legal order, the protected interests and the concept of archives in archival crime names should be established by the Archives Law, while the system positioning and regulatory scope of archival crime names should be independently judged by the Criminal Law. Archives contain substantive values such as evidence, reference, and emotion. The protected interests of archival crime names are the safety of archives, rather than formal interests such as order and system. Considering the optimization of the criminal law crime name system, a special section of "Obstructing Archives Management" should be separately added under the crime of "Disrupting Social Management Order". The concept of archives is different from property, specific information content, and cultural relics. The objects of archival crimes can cover some non-state-owned archives and copies. All illegal acts stipulated in the Archives Law can be criminalized through the "serious circumstances" quantitative element. Specifically, archival crimes can be classified into four categories, and corresponding crime names should be modified or added.