[Kjetil Aakra]

John, I asked Erik Pilawskii about this as he is one of the most informed people I know of on the subject. Here's what he wrote:

Typically, one sees a political agenda in asking such a question, but perhaps in the case of this chap that
is not so. The basic matter is very simple, really: the idea that Soviet and Russian archives have been closed--
at any time--is a product of Cold War propaganda, and nonsense attributable to that hysteria. I also have
seen, alas, that this lie has been used as a very convenient excuse to conceal poor research on the part of
authors, unscholarly behaviour, and even outright fabrication. It is the default 'get out' clause for poltroons of
every stripe writing on the subject of Russia or the USSR.

Essentially, the vast, vast majority of all Soviet archival holdings were open to proper researchers from
any country. I know of no time when this was not true, at least after 1960. However, allow me to underline
"proper"; it could be difficult in some cases for persons to convince Soviet authorities that they were indeed
bona fide historians and/or academics. Without some form of credentials or experience recognisable to the
Soviet bureaucracy, one would often find their request ignored, and permissions thus not granted. On the
other hand, once one was seen to be a genuine researcher, the treatment from the Government tended to
be quite courteous and professional, albeit highly bureaucratic.

One should also mention that a certain familiarity with the Soviet bureaucracy was important to get
proper access to the collections. Submitting a certain request through one Ministry might be more successful
than another, for example, and different archives came under the jurisdiction of different authorities. Also, the
paperwork itself took quite a while; one year was usually required to prepare for a lengthy research trip (in my
own case). I, personally, was never denied access to any collection for which I obtained the correct papers,
stamps and signatures. Even rather sensitive collections, mind you, such as primary economic data, and the
like. However, I was routinely denied access to any collection, no matter how humble, for failing to obtain the
necessary forms and stamps. This was typical of the obsessive Soviet bureaucratic mentality, but it cannot be
politicised as having a sinister motive-- there was no attempt at concealment, only a sort-of cult worship of
bureaucratic proceduralism.

The collections themselves were pretty well maintained during Soviet times. The problem for any would-
be researcher was the sheer size of the various collections. The USSR was the bureaucracy par excellence,
and the number of papers even in a minor holding could easily run into the billions (that is no exaggeration). A
typical reference for a finding reveals the enormity of the problem, such as "19188/462/233", which means
'collection 19188, folder 462, page 233'! This type of indexing was thoroughly common, and yes, the
collections were indeed numbered sequentially. The index might list, for example, "military causalties of the 2nd
Guards Tank Army" and the following list of folders could span 3-4 pages... where to start? To locate the
material one wished to see within such a vast holding was a challenge, but in Soviet times one was greatly
assisted by the outstanding and helpful staffs at the various archives.

In modern Russia the archival holdings have undergone a tremendous change. Most archival collections
have now been centralised under the gigantic RGVA. It is no longer clear, in this process, what has happened
to the original file indexing of the donating collection. There are cases in which this has survived, unmodified,
and other cases in which the parent collection's numeration was discarded entirely. Some collections seem to
have disappeared in this centralising work, though again I suspect no ulterior motive other than having been
lost in such a monumental undertaking on strictly limited resources. I presume that these will later materialise
buried amongst other papers. It is also known that some material has been discarded during this centralisation
at RGVA; alas, I am aware of no one who is quite familiar with the scope nor methodology of this 'weeding
out' process.

The modern RGVA can be accessed by anyone physically arriving in Moscow who has an appointment,
who pays the fee, and who can specify the folder (usually one per day is now the limit) in which they are
interested. Indexes of the RGVA collection are in book form, and there are many of them. Many indexes are
lists of special interest topics, such as "captured German documents", or "military casualties", or what have
you. These books must be purchased by the would-be researcher, or examined in a public library (such copies
are rare).

However, one should keep in mind that the mandate of the modern RGVA is rather different than those
of the preceding individual archives. The RGVA is a gate-keeper body, controlling access to the collections and
also spending a lot of effort to catalogue these in a more modern way. Certainly, finding records within this
enormous holding will be greatly influenced by this work. On the other hand, gone are the days when a friendly
professional staff will assist the researcher with their personal expertise in the various collections. It remains to
be seen if the new RGVA formula will be an improvement in the end over the old system. Currently, it is
certainly inferior; access to the material is extremely limited now due to the policy of 'one folder per day', and
also the need to specify in advance what said folder will be. A mistake here costs the researcher their fee, and
the entire day wasted. For a visiting foreign researcher, the old system was by far preferable, and I for one
am sad to see it gone....