What do you think?
Rate this book
Moldova: A History
Moldova is a new nation-state with a long history. Despite only recently gaining independence, following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Moldova's roots stretch all the way back to the Principality of Moldavia, established in 1359. After centuries toiling under Ottoman control, and latterly Russian Imperial rule, the Moldovans briefly tasted independence in the early twentieth century, before being annexed by the Soviet Union. In recent times, the Transnistrian Dispute has once again threatened the sovereignty, and indeed the independence, of Moldova and this conflict remains unresolved today.
For the first time in English, this book places the problems of contemporary Moldova in a long-term historical perspective. It argues that the Moldovans' complex relations with the Russians and the West are not simply the product of the Soviet era but have their roots in earlier centuries. Haynes contends that the Moldovan lands, and Moldovan identity and culture, have long been contested: by the Roman and Byzantine Empires of antiquity, by the expanding Hungarian and Polish-Lithuanian kingdoms in the Middle Ages, by the Ottoman, Habsburg, Russian and Soviet empires in more recent centuries, and by the Romanian state. The book provides a political and cultural history of the growth and development of the medieval Principality of Moldova, the Principality's partition and Russian rule in Bessarabia from 1812, Bessarabia under Romanian rule in the inter-war period, Soviet Moldova and the independent Republic of Moldova.
For the first time in English, this book places the problems of contemporary Moldova in a long-term historical perspective. It argues that the Moldovans' complex relations with the Russians and the West are not simply the product of the Soviet era but have their roots in earlier centuries. Haynes contends that the Moldovan lands, and Moldovan identity and culture, have long been contested: by the Roman and Byzantine Empires of antiquity, by the expanding Hungarian and Polish-Lithuanian kingdoms in the Middle Ages, by the Ottoman, Habsburg, Russian and Soviet empires in more recent centuries, and by the Romanian state. The book provides a political and cultural history of the growth and development of the medieval Principality of Moldova, the Principality's partition and Russian rule in Bessarabia from 1812, Bessarabia under Romanian rule in the inter-war period, Soviet Moldova and the independent Republic of Moldova.
256 pages, Hardcover
Published March 19, 2020
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
June 14, 2024
Extensively researched, but dryly written. The book would be greatly improved by structuring the text into smaller chapters or paragraphs; as it is now, it is very densely packed with information but difficult to keep a hold on (the significance of) development in the grand scheme of things.
Also, it was quite an anticlimax to find a political/cultural history of Moldova concluded by predicting the deteriorating quality of Moldova's nature--this wasn't a topic in the book at all and I was confused by the choice for this way to wrap up the book.
Respect for the nuanced overview of this complicated history, though. Haynes did a great job showing the tension between the Moldovan nation (if it is one) and Romanian, Russian, and European politics, looking at the region's history to explain current issues.
A highly educational book, though not necessarily a sparkling read.
Also, it was quite an anticlimax to find a political/cultural history of Moldova concluded by predicting the deteriorating quality of Moldova's nature--this wasn't a topic in the book at all and I was confused by the choice for this way to wrap up the book.
Respect for the nuanced overview of this complicated history, though. Haynes did a great job showing the tension between the Moldovan nation (if it is one) and Romanian, Russian, and European politics, looking at the region's history to explain current issues.
A highly educational book, though not necessarily a sparkling read.
May 11, 2020
Excellent!
September 3, 2025
Haynes provides a compact yet wide-ranging introduction to Moldova’s turbulent past. Over less than 180 pages of main text, Haynes traces the country’s journey from its medieval roots through Ottoman rule, Russian expansion, Romanian unification, Soviet control, and the challenges of independence. The book draws on a wide variety of sources and succeeds in giving readers a clear sense of how Moldova’s identity has been shaped by shifting borders, competing powers, and cultural divides.
At the same time, the style leans toward the academic rather than the narrative. The chapters are packed with information, and the rapid succession of names, dates, and events can feel demanding, particularly for readers unfamiliar with the region. While it offers valuable context and structure, the book prioritizes description over deep analysis. The final sections touch on modern democratic politics and contemporary challenges but stop short of developing strong arguments or distinctive conclusions.
For readers seeking a solid, concise overview written with authority, this is a useful and informative introduction. However, those looking for a more engaging, argument-driven account of Moldova’s history may find it somewhat restrained.
At the same time, the style leans toward the academic rather than the narrative. The chapters are packed with information, and the rapid succession of names, dates, and events can feel demanding, particularly for readers unfamiliar with the region. While it offers valuable context and structure, the book prioritizes description over deep analysis. The final sections touch on modern democratic politics and contemporary challenges but stop short of developing strong arguments or distinctive conclusions.
For readers seeking a solid, concise overview written with authority, this is a useful and informative introduction. However, those looking for a more engaging, argument-driven account of Moldova’s history may find it somewhat restrained.
March 5, 2026
An enjoyable and relatively short history of Moldova spanning the course of centuries. Admirable in its breadth, the book slightly errs when it comes to narrative flair and perhaps could have been expanded at points - but don’t let that distract from what this is. A very solid, introductory, english language history of Moldova that is well worth a read. 7/10.
May 3, 2026
“The introduction of French cultural influences into the principalities and Romania was thus responsible for important discontinuities in Romanian history. In turning decisively away from their Orthodox Slav neighbours, with whom they had lived in religious and political symbiosis for over a thousand years, the Romanians ceased to be at the geographic and cultural heartland of the Orthodox world and transformed themselves into ‘a Latin island in a sea of Slavs’”.
“The vice-governor of Bessarabia (Moldova), Filip Vigel, described the Bessarabian capital at the time in the most deprecatory terms: ‘A vaster, more endless, ugly, and untidy village I have never seen.’”
“It appears that Pushkin himself acquired a veritable hatred of the city, which he called ‘Sodom-Chişinău’”.
4 stars. If you’re looking for an academic, informative, but also approachable (I.e. not overly long) introduction to Moldovan history, this is your book! Rebecca Haynes does great job of presenting the full sweep of Moldovan history - from the 14th century to the 21st - in a very accessible 180 pages. She really does a great job of presenting this history in such a way as to make its relevance to the present fairly obvious most of the time.
A few things stand out.
1. Being unacquainted with Moldovan history, I’d always lazily assumed its history was that of Romania up until the point it was annexed by the Russian Empire. This book does a great job of underscoring how Moldova’s history diverged from the other parts of what would become Romania in important ways centuries earlier than I’d realized.
2. The edge of empires and the centre of Orthodox Christendom. For all of the polities which would become Romania - but especially Moldova - you really get a sense of how adroitly they played the diplomacy game over centuries, negotiating complicated arrangements with, and pressing their advantage against, by turns, (Catholic) Poland-Lithuania, (Catholic) Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, the Central Powers, and ultimately the Soviet Union and Romania itself. Perhaps more intriguingly, I never considered/realized that after the fall of Constantinople, Moldova viewed itself for a time as the inheritor of Orthodox Christianity and its primary patron. Today we think of Romania as being a place with a history traceable back to Rome - think of how frequently the point of Romanian being a “romance” language comes up - yet in fact it was its Byzantine, Orthodox Christian heritage which clearly defined the Moldovan/Romanian sense of identity for centuries.
3. The role of the Greek diaspora in religious and political life. During Moldova’s time as an Ottoman vassal, the Ottoman government favoured (Orthodox) Greek nobles with families largely still based in Constantinople to serve as the rulers of Moldova - the so-called ‘Phanariots’”. It was interesting and topical to read about how this system proved to be so crappy and how it ironically precipitated what Haynes calls a rise in local “Graecophobia” among the Orthodox and already-somewhat-Hellenized Moldovan nobility. Haynes manages to find some incredible contemporary British accounts of this period. Per an 18th century English merchant in Constantinople, the courts of the Greek ruling families in Moldova were: “a ridiculous combination of all that is grotesque in ceremony with all that is vulgar in manners”, while he described their relatives, fresh from Constantinople as “a flock of harpies”. On the subject of the system of selecting these rulers, the British consul in Bucharest opined that the Sultan regarded the Moldovan and Wallachian principalities “as farms which were to be let out to the highest bidders; the farmer-princes were therefore deposed and recalled, whenever promises of others of their countrymen appeared more advantageous.”
4. 1812, 1919, 1940, 1991. Especially regarding the first of these dates: 1812 (The Treaty of Bucharest which granted the eastern half of the Principality of Moldova to the Russian Empire who named it Bessarabia), you really get a sense how during these brief windows of change decisions were made which reverberated for centuries. If Russia had moved a bit quicker, or if Napoleon had moved a bit slower, or differently, probably all of Moldova, or all of Moldova and Wallachia, or none of either, would have been ceded to Russia. Later, in 1924, had the USSR not elected to create the Moldovan Autonomous SSR on the left bank of the Dniester (on what was always Ukrainian territory) as a means of messing with now-Romanian-held Bessarabia - and then not chosen to merge it with Bessarabia when they took it back in the 1940s, the Transnistria conflict probably wouldn’t exist today. It’s interesting to read about and good to have a grasp of the particular decisions which directly shape the present moment, is what I’m saying.
Finally, the main reason I docked a star is because the portions on the Soviet and modern eras were just way too rushed and superficial, especially compared to some of the earlier sections. Clearly the author is just not in her wheelhouse anymore post WWII, or else she must have run out of steam.
Highly recommended for anyone wanting to learn more about Moldova/Romania.
“The vice-governor of Bessarabia (Moldova), Filip Vigel, described the Bessarabian capital at the time in the most deprecatory terms: ‘A vaster, more endless, ugly, and untidy village I have never seen.’”
“It appears that Pushkin himself acquired a veritable hatred of the city, which he called ‘Sodom-Chişinău’”.
4 stars. If you’re looking for an academic, informative, but also approachable (I.e. not overly long) introduction to Moldovan history, this is your book! Rebecca Haynes does great job of presenting the full sweep of Moldovan history - from the 14th century to the 21st - in a very accessible 180 pages. She really does a great job of presenting this history in such a way as to make its relevance to the present fairly obvious most of the time.
A few things stand out.
1. Being unacquainted with Moldovan history, I’d always lazily assumed its history was that of Romania up until the point it was annexed by the Russian Empire. This book does a great job of underscoring how Moldova’s history diverged from the other parts of what would become Romania in important ways centuries earlier than I’d realized.
2. The edge of empires and the centre of Orthodox Christendom. For all of the polities which would become Romania - but especially Moldova - you really get a sense of how adroitly they played the diplomacy game over centuries, negotiating complicated arrangements with, and pressing their advantage against, by turns, (Catholic) Poland-Lithuania, (Catholic) Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, the Central Powers, and ultimately the Soviet Union and Romania itself. Perhaps more intriguingly, I never considered/realized that after the fall of Constantinople, Moldova viewed itself for a time as the inheritor of Orthodox Christianity and its primary patron. Today we think of Romania as being a place with a history traceable back to Rome - think of how frequently the point of Romanian being a “romance” language comes up - yet in fact it was its Byzantine, Orthodox Christian heritage which clearly defined the Moldovan/Romanian sense of identity for centuries.
3. The role of the Greek diaspora in religious and political life. During Moldova’s time as an Ottoman vassal, the Ottoman government favoured (Orthodox) Greek nobles with families largely still based in Constantinople to serve as the rulers of Moldova - the so-called ‘Phanariots’”. It was interesting and topical to read about how this system proved to be so crappy and how it ironically precipitated what Haynes calls a rise in local “Graecophobia” among the Orthodox and already-somewhat-Hellenized Moldovan nobility. Haynes manages to find some incredible contemporary British accounts of this period. Per an 18th century English merchant in Constantinople, the courts of the Greek ruling families in Moldova were: “a ridiculous combination of all that is grotesque in ceremony with all that is vulgar in manners”, while he described their relatives, fresh from Constantinople as “a flock of harpies”. On the subject of the system of selecting these rulers, the British consul in Bucharest opined that the Sultan regarded the Moldovan and Wallachian principalities “as farms which were to be let out to the highest bidders; the farmer-princes were therefore deposed and recalled, whenever promises of others of their countrymen appeared more advantageous.”
4. 1812, 1919, 1940, 1991. Especially regarding the first of these dates: 1812 (The Treaty of Bucharest which granted the eastern half of the Principality of Moldova to the Russian Empire who named it Bessarabia), you really get a sense how during these brief windows of change decisions were made which reverberated for centuries. If Russia had moved a bit quicker, or if Napoleon had moved a bit slower, or differently, probably all of Moldova, or all of Moldova and Wallachia, or none of either, would have been ceded to Russia. Later, in 1924, had the USSR not elected to create the Moldovan Autonomous SSR on the left bank of the Dniester (on what was always Ukrainian territory) as a means of messing with now-Romanian-held Bessarabia - and then not chosen to merge it with Bessarabia when they took it back in the 1940s, the Transnistria conflict probably wouldn’t exist today. It’s interesting to read about and good to have a grasp of the particular decisions which directly shape the present moment, is what I’m saying.
Finally, the main reason I docked a star is because the portions on the Soviet and modern eras were just way too rushed and superficial, especially compared to some of the earlier sections. Clearly the author is just not in her wheelhouse anymore post WWII, or else she must have run out of steam.
Highly recommended for anyone wanting to learn more about Moldova/Romania.
September 30, 2020
Excellent, informative, well written and researched.
January 31, 2024
“Moldova has stood at the edges of empires- of the Roman and Byzantine empires, of the empires of the nomads, of the expanding Hungarian and Polish-Lithuanian kingdoms and of the Ottoman, Hapsburg, and Russian and Soviet empires…Moldovan identity rests on foundations as fluid as its territory.”
Moldova in Middle Ages hedged alternatively by Hungary + Poland-Lithuania, experienced period of cultural/political power in the 15th century under the viovodes Alexander the Good (1400-1432) and Stephen the Great (1457-1504), both establish Moldova as important center of Orthodoxy + good relations with the Patriarch of Constantinople, defended Moldova from Catholic and Ottoman incursions.
Under the Ottomans in 1500s - 1700s, Moldavia and Wallachia enjoyed privileged position as the only two Orthodox territories under Ottoman control. Moldova generously sponsored Orthodox/Byzantine institutions in the Ottoman occupied southern Europe. Early Moldovan leaders under Ottomans considered themselves heirs to fallen Byzantium, developed extravagant court culture/ state ceremonies in the Byzantine fashion. Short violent reigns during this period, as high viovode turnover profitable for Ottomans. Phanoriot leaders in the 18th century, during Enlightenment in W. Europe, instituted some liberalizing reforms, but largely repressive and brutal leaders. Ottomans became more directly involved + oppressive in Moldova as their power waned in late 1700s.
Substantial relations w Russia started only in the late 1700s, when a newly powerful Russia warred w Ottomans. Pro-Russian Moldovans boyars lobbied for Russian control of Moldova subsequent to Ottoman defeat, in part bc of Orthodox connection. Resulted in 1812 Treaty of Bucharest, when Moldovan territory between Prut and Dniester given to Russia, called “Bessarabia”. Russian rule highly oppressive, “Russification” imposed wherein cities overwhelmingly dominated by non-Moldovans, Romanian language forbidden in favor of Russian, and native Moldovans generally displaced.
After Russian revolution, Bessarabia absorbed into a Romania closely allied to Third Reich. Romania oppressed Moldovan ethnic monitories in particular. First Jewish pogroms initiated under Romanian rule. In 1924, Soviets create MASSR from Ukrainian territory Transnistria, which had no cultural or historical connection with Moldavia. MASSR populated largely by Russians or Russified Ukrainians, and created as a launchpad for Russian physical or ideological incursions into Romanian Moldova. Over course of Soviet rule of Moldova in 20th century, MASSR became the industrial center of Moldova and the trade connection of Moldova to USSR. MASSR or Russia supplied all Soviet leaders in Moldova. “To become a minister, you must be from the other side of the Dniester”.
Moldova now caught between EU, Romania, and Russia. Expression of national identity, and language choice, is inflected by preferred alliance to one of three. Two centuries of Russian rule however created distinct evolution of Moldovan identity, separating it in meaningful ways from Romania.
Moldova in Middle Ages hedged alternatively by Hungary + Poland-Lithuania, experienced period of cultural/political power in the 15th century under the viovodes Alexander the Good (1400-1432) and Stephen the Great (1457-1504), both establish Moldova as important center of Orthodoxy + good relations with the Patriarch of Constantinople, defended Moldova from Catholic and Ottoman incursions.
Under the Ottomans in 1500s - 1700s, Moldavia and Wallachia enjoyed privileged position as the only two Orthodox territories under Ottoman control. Moldova generously sponsored Orthodox/Byzantine institutions in the Ottoman occupied southern Europe. Early Moldovan leaders under Ottomans considered themselves heirs to fallen Byzantium, developed extravagant court culture/ state ceremonies in the Byzantine fashion. Short violent reigns during this period, as high viovode turnover profitable for Ottomans. Phanoriot leaders in the 18th century, during Enlightenment in W. Europe, instituted some liberalizing reforms, but largely repressive and brutal leaders. Ottomans became more directly involved + oppressive in Moldova as their power waned in late 1700s.
Substantial relations w Russia started only in the late 1700s, when a newly powerful Russia warred w Ottomans. Pro-Russian Moldovans boyars lobbied for Russian control of Moldova subsequent to Ottoman defeat, in part bc of Orthodox connection. Resulted in 1812 Treaty of Bucharest, when Moldovan territory between Prut and Dniester given to Russia, called “Bessarabia”. Russian rule highly oppressive, “Russification” imposed wherein cities overwhelmingly dominated by non-Moldovans, Romanian language forbidden in favor of Russian, and native Moldovans generally displaced.
After Russian revolution, Bessarabia absorbed into a Romania closely allied to Third Reich. Romania oppressed Moldovan ethnic monitories in particular. First Jewish pogroms initiated under Romanian rule. In 1924, Soviets create MASSR from Ukrainian territory Transnistria, which had no cultural or historical connection with Moldavia. MASSR populated largely by Russians or Russified Ukrainians, and created as a launchpad for Russian physical or ideological incursions into Romanian Moldova. Over course of Soviet rule of Moldova in 20th century, MASSR became the industrial center of Moldova and the trade connection of Moldova to USSR. MASSR or Russia supplied all Soviet leaders in Moldova. “To become a minister, you must be from the other side of the Dniester”.
Moldova now caught between EU, Romania, and Russia. Expression of national identity, and language choice, is inflected by preferred alliance to one of three. Two centuries of Russian rule however created distinct evolution of Moldovan identity, separating it in meaningful ways from Romania.
March 3, 2025
The English speaking audience does not have a great deal of books to choose from on Moldova's history. Haynes' book is a great introduction to the topic and it answers all the important questions one could have about Moldova. She worked from plenty of English, German and Romanian sources, it's all footnoted and listed at the end - in case you want to dig deeper into a specific topic.
There is a seemingly overwhelming amount of names, places, dates and events at the beginning of the books - as other reviewers have noted - so if you are not familiar with the history or general geography of Eastern Europe, a map might come in handy. As we move forward in time, things get clearer and easier.
If you are curious about the current events, I could also recommend this book since it ends with the election of Krasnoselsky in 2016. The last chapter on democratic politics and Transnistria issue is great.
There is a seemingly overwhelming amount of names, places, dates and events at the beginning of the books - as other reviewers have noted - so if you are not familiar with the history or general geography of Eastern Europe, a map might come in handy. As we move forward in time, things get clearer and easier.
If you are curious about the current events, I could also recommend this book since it ends with the election of Krasnoselsky in 2016. The last chapter on democratic politics and Transnistria issue is great.
August 27, 2023
This book gives a very good overview over Moldovan history as a place at the edge of empires such as the Romans, the Ottomans and Russia. Yet the book also reveals the agency of Moldovan rulers, cultural continuities and national distinctiveness, which is already a great thing to read about because in the usual literature of empires, the periphery gets usually overlooked. This is important because nowadays, Moldova's national destiny is yet again at a crossroads between the EU and Russia. Haynes does a great job at highlighting the contestation and construction of Moldovan national identity with great detail. However, I think that the chapter on democracy in Moldova could have been more extensive, because some aspects such as Putin's meddling Moldova or the EU's role in Moldova are only briefly touched upon.
July 21, 2025
Moldova: A History is certainly not for anyone who has a dislike for more textbook-y and less narrative-driven non-fiction. I’m perfectly fine with textbook style nonfiction, and this book will excellently help me out with World Food Prize. The book was great when it came to the nuances of the Moldovan identity, the cause and effect of Moldova’s subsequent downturn, and the challenges this state will face in the future.
My work is cut out for me though 🫠
My work is cut out for me though 🫠
October 19, 2024
I thoroughly enjoyed this retrospective of Moldova's history. Unlike other books on the subject, this one is written by an external observer and has no pro-west or pro-east bias in its narration and interpretation of the past.
I'll think about this book as I go to the voting booth tomorrow.
Thank you, Rebecca!
I'll think about this book as I go to the voting booth tomorrow.
Thank you, Rebecca!
February 8, 2022
As a previous resident of Romania, I find this part of the world (including Moldavia) to be pretty compelling. Caught between a number of different empires this book offers a useful insight into an often undocumented area, at least in the English speaking world. For the Western European it can seem a place on the peripheries, but it’s been part of making European history for centuries. I found this book to be a much needed account of this area, much of the names and figures were unfamiliar to me, and felt a slightly heavier focus on the medieval period.
The more recent history I found particularly compelling, and in the current climate an important look on a contested part of the world.
The more recent history I found particularly compelling, and in the current climate an important look on a contested part of the world.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews