CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Administrative divisions of Moldova

administrative-territorial organization of a country

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJul 4, 2026
Entity authorityQ542797
Source-derived summary

Moldova is divided administratively into two levels:

First level:

32 districts or raions (Romanian: raioane)

3 municipalities (municipii)—specifically Chișinău, Bălți, and Bender

2 autonomous territorial units: Gagauzia and Left Bank of the Dniester (de facto Transnistria, which is not under control of the government of Moldova)

Second level:

Villages (Romanian: sate); two or more villages can form together a commune (Romanian: comună)

Sectors

10 municipalities (municipii)

Cities and towns

Localities

Moldova has a total of 1,682 localities; from these 982 are incorporated (de jure with 982 mayors and 982 local councils), including 53 cities/towns, other 13 cities with municipality status (see municipiu), and 916 rural localities. They cover the entire area of the country. A number of villages are self-governed, while others 700 villages are too small to have a separate administration, and are part of either cities/towns/municipalities (41 of them) or communes (659). Few localities are inhabited.

Current divisions

In the administrative-territorial structure of Moldova are 898 second-level administrative territorial units (cities/towns, sectors and villages/communes).

The status of Chișinău, Bălți, and Tighina as municipalities and first-level territorial units of the country allows their suburb villages to have, when large enough, their own mayor and local council. By contrast, the villages that are administratively part of (some of) the other cities do not retain self-rule.

Districts (32):

District-level municipalities (3):

Autonomous territorial units (2):

¹ Tighina and the Administrative-Territorial Units of the Left Bank of the Dniester are under the control of the unrecognized separatist Pridnestrovian Moldavian Republic (PMR, also known as Transnistria). There, Tighina is known as Bender.

Areas not under central government control

Transnistria, which with the exception of six communes (comprising a total of ten localities) corresponds to the geographic part of Moldova situated to the east of the Dniestr (Romanian: Nistru) river, is de jure a part of Moldova, but in fact is governed by breakaway authorities (see also: War of Transnistria).

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Administrative divisions of Moldova” is administrative-territorial organization of a country. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Administrative, divisions and Moldova, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewMost valuable as an event-and-institution map that identifies actors, dates and record creators for deeper historical inquiry. The current 316-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Administrative, divisions and Moldova is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “administrative-territorial organization of a country” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Chronology, provenance and viewpoint should be read together before a broad social or political interpretation is accepted. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 4, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q542797. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Later summaries often reconcile disputed chronology or motive more neatly than the contemporary record permits. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Administrative divisions of Moldova”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Administrative divisions of Moldova primary sources, Administrative divisions of Moldova archive and Administrative research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Administrative divisions of Moldova”?
  2. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
  3. Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Administrative divisions of Moldova” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.