British Army
of the British Armed Forces
Components
Army (Operational structure of the British ArmyList of unitscurrent regiments)
Army Reserve
Administration
Army Headquarters
Overseas
British Forces Germany
British Forces Cyprus
British Forces Falkland Islands
British Forces Gibraltar
British Forces Brunei
Personnel
Senior officers
Officer insignia
Other ranks insignia
Equipment
Current equipment
British military rifles
History

History
Timeline
Recruitment

United Kingdom portalvt
This is a list of equipment of the British Army currently in use. It includes small arms, combat vehicles, aircraft, watercraft, artillery and transport vehicles. The primary task of the British Army is to help defend the interests of the United Kingdom, but it can also serve as part of a North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) force, or a United Nations (UN) or any other multi-national force. To meet its commitments, the equipment of the army is constantly updated and modified. To meet any shortage or requirement on operations, the army can request equipment under an Urgent Operational Requirement (UOR), which supplements planned equipment programmes.[1]

Infantry section equipment

The infantry section normally has two four-man infantry fire teams. On operations, each fire team is usually equipped with the following:[2]
Weapons
L85A3 rifle
L85A3 rifle with L123A2 UGL (underslung grenade launcher)
L129A1[3] sharpshooter rifle
L85A3 rifle or GPMG (Issued at commanding officer’s discretion)
AT4 84mm anti-tank weapon
L72A9 light anti-structure munition
L84 White phosphorus smoke grenades
L109A1 High explosive grenades
L132A1 Smoke grenades
Vision systems
Sight Unit Small Arms, Trilux (SUSAT) or SpecterOS[4] Lightweight Day Sights (LDS)
Advanced Combat Optical Gunsight (ACOG) to be used with the L129A1 rifle
Image intensified Common Weapon Sights
Laser Light Module Vario Ray Adaptive Target Acquisition Modules[5]
TAM-14 small Thermal Imaging System
Head mounted Night Vision System (HNVS), based on the American AN/PVS-14.[6]
VIPIR-2+ thermal imaging weapon sights
Commander's target locating systems (CTLS)
Communications equipment
Personal Role Radio (PRR) - one issued to each member.[7]
Bowman secure VHF Radio
There are currently plans to change the structure of equipment of a section with the return of the L7A2 MG to replace the L110 LMG and also bring more L85A2 assault rifles into use during 2019.
This should see a section equipped with six L85A2 assault rifles, two with L123A2 UGLs attached, one L129a1 rifle and one L7A2 machine gun.
Weapons
Firearms

Machine guns

Explosives

Indirect fire weapons

Portable anti-material weapons

Personal equipment
Protective equipment

The standard helmet in service is the Mk.7, which replaced the older Mk 6 helmet. The Mk.7 helmet is equipped with a new harness that keeps the helmet more stable on the head when night vision equipment is fitted. It is also better integrated with new weapon sights, making it easier to use in a variety of fighting positions.
Since 2006, troops in Afghanistan (and until 2009 Iraq), have been issued with Osprey body armour. This has provided much better protection than previous body armour systems. The new Mk 4 'Osprey Assault' body armour, which replaced the older Osprey vests, provides the same ballistic protection, while improving the comfort of personnel on operations in Afghanistan. It has all the stopping power of the previous body armour, but is closer fitting, less bulky and is easier to move in. It is specifically developed to meet the British Army's requirements, using cutting edge materials and manufacturing technology.[48]
Both the Mk 7 helmet and the Osprey armour are slated to be replaced by the Virtus system. The Virtus vest is even closer fitting and lighter than the Opsrey Mk 4, and features a quick-release mechanism to aid safe extraction from hazardous situations such as burning vehicles, and a dynamic weight distribution system which, when linked to a user's waist belt, aids in spreading the load of the armour and a bergen or other backpack across the back, shoulders, and hips. The Virtus helmet provides increased blunt impact protection, is specially shaped to allow effective weapon usage while in a prone position, and features a permanent night vision mount and a scalable counterweight attached to the helmet’s rear in order to ease strain on the user’s neck.[49]
In January 2015, over 300,000 General Service Respirators had been delivered to replace the in-service S10 respirator.[50] These respirators are also used by the Royal Navy, Royal Air Force and Royal Fleet Auxiliary.
Multi-Terrain Pattern

The Multi-Terrain Pattern is designed and intended to perform consistently across a wide range of environments. A wide range of camouflage colours were trialled in Britain, Cyprus, Kenya and Afghanistan, ultimately the Crye's "Multicam" pattern was determined to be the best performing, across the widest range of environments (by a significant margin) and was subsequently selected as the basis for the new British MTP camouflage, and combined with the existing British DPM pattern. The MTP pattern itself was not trialled against other patterns and its adoption was based solely on its similarity to the original Crye Multicam pattern.[51]
Boots

In 2012 the MOD purchased a newly designed range of brown combat boots from Haix,[52] Alt-Berg,[53] and other manufacturers for the Army, Royal Navy and RAF to replace the black and desert combat footwear previously worn. Five different boots, developed to match the Multi-Terrain Pattern uniform, are available to Armed Forces personnel depending on where they are based and what role they are in. Each of the five boot types comes in two different styles, with personnel being able to wear the particular style they find most comfortable. Black boots have been retained for wear with most non-camouflage uniforms as well as units on parade in full dress uniform, such as regiments performing ceremonial duties in central London.[54][55]
Desert Combat – worn by dismounted troops conducting medium to high levels of activity in desert type environments with temperatures exceeding 40°C
Desert Patrol – worn by drivers/armoured troops conducting lower levels of activity in desert type environments exceeding 40°C
Temperate Combat – worn by dismounted troops for medium to high levels of activity in temperate (European) climates
Patrol – worn by mounted troops (drivers/armoured troops) taking part in lower levels of activity in temperate (European) climates
Cold Wet Weather – worn by dismounted troops for medium to high levels of activity in temperatures down to −20°C.
Before the adoption of the brown boots, British troops were issued with desert combat boots manufactured by Meindl[56][57]  and Lowa[58] for use in Afghanistan. Both boots remain listed as part of the MOD's 'Black Bag' of operational clothing despite their official replacement by the brown boots,[59] and may be worn by individual soldiers in lieu of the issue footwear.
Bayonet

The current British L3A1 bayonet has a hollow handle that fits over the L85 rifle's muzzle and slots that line up with those on the flash eliminator. The blade is offset to the side of the handle to allow the bullet to pass beside the blade. It can also be used as a multi-purpose knife and wire-cutter when combined with its scabbard. The scabbard also has a sharpening stone and folding saw blade.
Personal Role Radio

A Personal Role Radio (PRR) is distributed to every member of an eight-strong infantry section.[7]
Personal Load Carrying Equipment

Soldiers need to carry ammunition, water, food and protective equipment. They use Personal Load Carrying Equipment (PLCE), a tough, modular system of camouflaged belt, yoke and pouches. To this can be added two small rucksacks and a large rucksack for additional carrying capacity, when required.[60] The PLCM is due to be upgraded to the new VIRTUS tactical vest next year, with testing with selected units currently taking place.[61]
PLCE is now very unlikely to be spotted on the front-lines due to the introduction of Osprey body armour, though MTP versions do exist and, due to its durability and the quantity produced, the webbing is often seen in use during training exercises.[62][63][64][65]
Future Integrated Soldier Technology

The Future Integrated Soldier Technology (FIST) is a programme under development by the Ministry of Defence. The programme is designed to achieve enhanced military effect through the used of advanced technologies improving the situational awareness, lethality and survivability of soldiers. Ultimately, the programme is part of the wider British Armed Forces doctrine of network-enabled capability. 35,000 sets of kit are expected to be bought and issued between 2015 and 2020. This equipment is designed to bring the British infantryman up to standards and link with new technology currently employed, including the new underslung grenade launcher for the SA80 and the deployed Bowman communications network. It is not intended that every soldier be equipped with FIST: instead, unit commanders will request FIST kits as necessary so that they can be tailored to the situation and mission aims.
Vehicles

Armoured

Artillery and air-defence

List of obsolete anti-tank guided missiles
Milkara
MILAN
Swingfire
Vigilant
Mobile artillery monitoring battlefield radar

The Mobile Artillery Monitoring Battlefield Radar ( or Mobile Artillery Monitoring Battlefield Asset) is a counter-battery radar. It detects enemy artillery projectiles fired by one or more weapons and from their trajectories locates the position of the weapon that fired it. It has a detection range of up to 30km and can process up-to 100 projectiles simultaneously. It is mounted on a Bandvagn 206 (Bv206) all-terrain vehicle. Five vehicles are operated by the 5th Regiment Royal Artillery.
Exactor

The Exactor is a previously classified purchase of the Rafael Spike-NLOS missile system. The system is primarily used for precise indirect counter barrage attacks at long ranges (30km (19mi)) where the GMLRS would result in too much collateral damage. It originally consisted of six Mk2 or Mk4 missiles mounted on an M113 chassis, of which 12 were purchased directly from the Israeli Defence Force with a further two chassis leased.
In 2010, the United Kingdom hired Rafael to produce an improved Mk 5 missile and also ditched the M-113 based launchers as they were poorly air-conditioned and difficult to keep running. These new missiles were mounted on a simpler flatbed trailer containing four missiles each. This new system was dubbed the Exactor 2 by the U.K. Ministry of Defence.[93] 18 such systems now exist within the Royal Artillery in six batteries of three[94]
Centurion

Centurion is a C-RAM system based on the 20mm Phalanx CIWS, originally acquired for used in Basra, Iraq. It is operated by 16th Regiment Royal Artillery, and intended to intercept incoming rockets, shells and mortars out to a 1.2km square area.[95] They are maintained by Babcock International in the United Kingdom. A total of 10 sets were purchased in 2005[96] but since then 4 have been reconverted back to the maritime variant[97]
Engineering and logistics

C vehicle fleet

The job of the Royal Engineers is to restrict the enemy's ability to advance, while also allowing friendly combat forces the freedom to maneuver as necessary. Other tasks undertaken are bomb disposal, the construction of fortifications, runways, roads and bridges and the improvement of existing infrastructure to support operations - such as improving existing roads for logistic convoys. To achieve this, the Royal Engineers operate a large and diverse fleet of vehicles. At present, the C vehicle fleet is provided by a private finance initiative (PFI) and consists of some 2,500 vehicles of over 160 types of "earthmoving plant, Engineer Construction Plant (ECP) and rough terrain Materials Handling Equipment (MHE)".
The provider of the PFI is Amey Lex Consortium (ALC), which was awarded a 15-year contract in 2005 for £600 million. The handing over of the C vehicle fleet to a PFI has improved overall efficiency, with ALC selecting common chassis for multiple roles and significantly reducing equipment types. This has led to reduced training needs in personnel, commonality of spares and an overall reduction in the logistic footprint and cost of maintenance.[112] ALC maintains the fleet at various degrees of readiness, with a large pool of the vehicles being modified and adapted for military use - however, the majority of the fleet is maintained at commercial standards. The fleet is dispersed worldwide to accommodate both existing and future operations. When in use, the vehicles are essentially being "hired on an ad hoc basis". To help sustain the C vehicle fleet on operations, the PFI includes a logistics support package.[113]
Miscellaneous

All-terrain vehicles

There are a number of all-terrain vehicles in service with the British Army. The Supacat ATMP is a lightweight 6×6 used by airborne and air-mobile forces. It can carry up to 8 troops with a standard NATO pallet of stores and ammunition. The Springer all-terrain vehicle is a light-role 4×2 load carriage platform, which can self-load a 1-ton pallet. Each vehicle is equipped with an 8,000lb (3,600kg) self-recovery winch and sand ladders, which act as loading ramps for a cargo pallet.[119][120] Approximately 900[121] Grizzly 450 quad bikes are used as light transport for things such as mortars, ammunition and general supplies.[120][122] Finally, the Harley Davidson MT350E and Honda R250 motorcycles are used by dispatch riders and for a variety of liaison and traffic control tasks.
Special forces
The Special forces maintain a unique fleet of vehicles to support their covert operations. In 2001, 65 Supacat High Mobility Transporter (HMT) 400 vehicles were ordered under Project Minacity after being in development for a special forces protected vehicle requirement since the late 1990s.[123] The Minacity vehicles entered service in 2003 in Afghanistan.[124] In 2008, 24 Australian Bushmaster armoured vehicles were purchased under a UOR for the SAS in Iraq providing all-round protection unlike the Minacity with an exposed crew.[125][126] It is fitted with additional armour, counter-IED electronics, and a .50 calibre machine gun mounted in a RWS.[127] In addition, other vehicles known to be in service are: 60 Toyota Hilux for special forces mobility; and 78 ACMAT VLRAs as tactical support vehicles to resupply and sustain special forces on operations.[128][129] In August 2016, the BBC reported that the Jankel Toyota Land Cruiser-based Al-Thalab long range patrol vehicle was being used in Syria.[130]
Aircraft

Britten-Norman Defender
AgustaWestland Apache
AgustaWestland AW159 Wildcat
Thales Watchkeeper WK450

Watercraft
Raiding craft

The raiding craft in service with the British Army are operated in large numbers, predominately with the Royal Engineers and the Royal Logistic Corps, for supporting both bridging and amphibious operations. These craft are highly versatile and often find themselves serving in environments ranging from the Arctic to the tropics.[131]
Mk.4 Workboat
Four boats in service,[132] operated by the Royal Logistic Corps as small tugs and general purpose work-boats in support of amphibious operations. They have a displacement of 48 tonnes and a maximum speed of 10 knots.[133]
Mexeflotes

Mexeflotes are amphibious landing raft operated by the Royal Logistic Corps for amphibious operations and are designed to deliver both armoured vehicles and material from ship to shore. They are deployed on the 16,160 tonne Bay-class landing ships of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary.
Future equipment

The Future Integrated Soldier Technology is a suite of equipment capable of enhancing an infantryman's effectiveness as part of the Future Soldier programme.[134]
The Future Rapid Effect System was a planned family of medium-weight armoured vehicles intended to replace the CVR(T) series of vehicles. This has been replaced by the Scout SV known as "Ajax" in British service and its variants.
An Armoured Battlefield Support Vehicle (ABSV) will replace some vehicles, such as the mortar carriers, in armoured infantry units[135]
The Land Ceptor Missile system will replace the Rapier by 2020.[136]
The MAN Support vehicle is currently being introduced into service. There will be 6,928 cargo vehicles, including unit support tankers, 288 recovery vehicles and 69 recovery trailers. Deployment is planned for 2014.[137]
UK MOD has a requirement to acquire a new Modular Assault Rifle System (MARS) for deployment with certain military units from 2014.[138]
A new body armour system known as Virtus is under development as a replacement for the Osprey vest and Mk. 7 helmet.[49]
The MoD has a requirement for a new multi role vehicle under the Multi Role Vehicle-Protected requirement with main gate expected in 2017. At DSEI 2015 General Dynamics UK announced that they would offer variants of their Ocelot (Foxhound) and Eagle vehicles for the requirement.[139][140] In July 2017, the US DSCA notified the US Congress of a possible sale of 2,747 JLTV vehicles and accessories to the UK.[141]
The British Army wants to purchase 8x8 wheeled armoured fighting vehicles to replace the Mastiff and Ridgeback in British Service. This program used to be part of FRES UV, later named simply UV (Utility Vehicle) and now known as Mechanised Infantry Vehicle (MIV). This vehicle is intended to equip the 4 "heavy protected mobility" battalions under Army 2020 Refine.[142] They will also be part of the 2 Strike Brigades proposed under the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015.[143]
Senior army officers and procurement officials are looking at either upgrading the Challenger 2 or outright replacing it. At DSEI 2015, army officials expressed their concern with the Challenger 2's armament and its inevitable obsolescence in coming years. Other causes of concern are the Challengers engine and electronics. The army stated that they had been in discussions with armoured fighting vehicle manufacturers about the future of the tank and its potential replacement.[144] A later Defense News article said that the British Army would still proceed with its Challenger 2 LEP, citing that a replacement at the present would be too costly.[145] On 22 December 2016, an assessment phase award was awarded to BAE Systems and Rheinmetall Land Systeme GmbH to progress the Challenger 2 Life Extension Project.[146]
Under the Non-Articulated Vehicle – Protected (NAV-P) program, the MoD is looking for a successor to the DROPS vehicles.[147]
See also

Other equipment lists
Royal Engineers bridging and trackway equipment
British Army communications and reconnaissance equipment
Unmanned systems of the British Army
Related articles
Future of the British Army (Army 2020)

 - Official British Army website managed by the Ministry of Defence.
 - The British Military Open Encyclopedia.
 - Defence industry database.

 - Information on equipment used by the SAS and other UK special forces.


Yugoslavia was a state concept among the South Slavic intelligentsia and later popular masses from the 17th to early 20th centuries that culminated in its realization after the 1918 collapse of Austria-Hungary at the end of World War I and the formation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. However, the kingdom was better known colloquially as Yugoslavia (or similar variants); in 1929 it was formally renamed the "Kingdom of Yugoslavia".
Origins of the idea

The first idea of a state for all South Slavs emerged in the late 17th century, a product of visionary thinking of Croatian writers and philosophers who believed that the only way for southern Slavs to regain lost freedom after centuries of occupation under the various empires would be to unite and free themselves from tyrannies and dictatorships.
In 1848, a plan was created for the creation of a South Slavic Federation. The plan initiated by the Serbian government was made up of the members of the Secret Belgrade Circle, among whom there were people close to the ruling circles.
The Serbs and the Croats, as the most conscious of the Yugoslavs, lay down the foundations of their political future, and by accepting them they promise that they will strive for their realization in a single direction, as far as the external environment permits this for each branch (the Yugoslavs):
For all Slavs the federation system is accepted.
The Yugoslavs will form a Yugoslavian state headed by one leader.
The Yugoslavs are divided into 3 tribes: Serbian, Croatian and Bulgarian.
Every tribe will have complete autonomy and its National Assembly headed by the deputy of the king, will manage its funds, offices, church affairs, and so on. The deputy will elect the clerks among the local population and present them to the king.
The king will have a ministry composed of the most capable of all tribes. At the general legislative assembly, all three tribes will be represented equally. Armed Forces will also be represented equally. The armed forces will also be concentrated and their costs will be distributed equally.
Each tribe will be given the opportunity to educate its people on its dialect, and the Serbian language and the Cyrillic alphabet will be accepted for the administration and literature.
The Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church will be on an equal footing.
The Croatian tribe refers to the following areas: Croatia and Slavonia (with a Military Border), Istria with the districts of Krajina, Carinthia and Slavic Styria, Bosnia from the land border to Vrbas and Dalmatia to Cetina, to Split and Zagreb districts where the capital of the Croatian kings was formerly located.
The Serbian tribe covers the following areas: Serbia, Sofia, North Macedonia, Zeta, Kotor and Dubrovnik, Dalmatia together with the islands of Montenegro, Herzegovina, Bosnia from Vrbas to Drina and Srem with Vojvodina.
All other areas refer to the Bulgarian tribe.
The tribes will help each other with the liberation from foreigners.
Each Yugoslav tribe will preserve its ethnographic name, all together being called Yugoslavs, and their state Yugoslavia.
[1]
In the 19th century, the Illyrian movement, as it came to be called, attracted many prominent Croatian intellectuals and politicians. It started gaining large momentum only at the end of the 19th century, mainly because of the Revolutions of 1848 and the policies against freedom movements of southern Slavs. However, ideas for a unified state did not mature from the conceptual to a practical state of planning, and few of those promoting such an entity had given any serious consideration to what form the new state should take.
As the Ottoman Empire grew weaker and Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece grew stronger after the Berlin Congress, there was new hope for sovereignty of the South Slavic peoples in Austria-Hungary, and the idea of a union between them gained momentum. Scholar Aurel Popovici proposed a reform called the "United States of Greater Austria" in 1906. Although his proposal was not acted upon by the Habsburg Emperor it was an inspiration for the peace conferences at the end of World War I.
Thomislav Bacurin in the early 19th century was one of the conceivers of Yugoslavia. The Yugoslav idea was forged by the Polish and other Western Slavic emigrants in the West who saw that a Russo-Austrian division of the Ottoman Empire must be prevented at all costs and a common state of all South Slavs forged. He enlisted Frantisek Zach (a Moravian enthusiast of Slavic reciprocity) and sent him to Belgrade on that mission with a drafted plan the "Načertanije".
In Vienna on 31 May 1907, Anton Korošec read the May Declaration in which the Slovenian people requested that the Austro-Hungarian Empire change from a dual to a triple monarchy: Austria-Hungary should not be divided to only Austria and Hungary anymore, but to three parts: Austria, Hungary and Yugoslavia. Yugoslavia would have consisted of separate Slovene, Croat and Serb entities from within the empire. The declaration was rejected.
Yugoslav Committee

During the early period of World War I (which started in 1914), a number of prominent political figures, including Ante Trumbić, Ivan Meštrović, Nikola Stojadinović and others from South Slavic lands under the Habsburg Empire fled to London, where they began work on forming a committee to represent the South Slavs of Austria-Hungary, choosing London as their headquarters.
The Yugoslav Committee was formed on 30 April 1915 in London, and began to raise funds, especially among South Slavs living in the Americas. These Yugoslavs were Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes who identified themselves with the movement toward a single Yugoslav or South Slavic state. Exiled Yugoslavs living in North America and Britain were the primary supporters of the Yugoslav Committee. Because of their stature, the members of the Yugoslav Committee were able to make their views known to the Allied governments, which began to take them more seriously as the fate of Austria-Hungary became more uncertain.
While the committee's basic aim was the unification of the Habsburg South Slav lands with the Kingdom of Serbia (which was independent at the time), its more immediate concern was to head off Italian claims on Habsburg territories in Istria and Dalmatia. In 1915, the Allies had lured the Italians into the war with a promise of substantial territorial gains in exchange. According to the secret Treaty of London, these included Istria and large parts of Dalmatia, which had mixed Italian and Slavic populations.
Corfu Declaration

In 1916 the Serbian Parliament in exile decided in favor of the creation of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia at a meeting inside the Municipal Theatre of Corfu.[2]
During June and July 1917, the Yugoslav Committee met with the Serbian government in Corfu and, on 20 July, a declaration that laid the foundation for the post-war state was issued. The preamble stated that the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes were "the same by blood, by language, by the feelings of their unity, by the continuity and integrity of the territory which they inhabit undividedly, and by the common vital interests of their national survival and manifold development of their moral and material life." The future state was to be called the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and was to be a constitutional monarchy under the Karađorđević dynasty.[3]
State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs

As the Habsburg Empire dissolved, a pro-Entente National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs took power in Zagreb on 6 October 1918. On 29 October, a Yugoslavist Croatian Sabor (parliament) declared independence and vested its sovereignty in the new State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, and two days later it declared its wish to enter state of union with Serbia and Montenegro. Soon afterward on 5 November the National Council in Zagreb asked the Serbian military for help in controlling anarchy in Croatia. Because help did not arrive before the end of November, the National Council again asked the Serbian army for help because: "The population is in revolt. We have total anarchy and only the Serbian army can restore order".[4]
The Yugoslav Committee was given the task of representing the new state abroad. However, quarrels broke out immediately about the terms of the proposed union with Serbia. Svetozar Pribićević, a Croatian Serb, a leader of the Croatian-Serbian Coalition and vice-president of the state, wanted an immediate and unconditional union. Others (non-Serbs), who favoured a federal Yugoslavia, were more hesitant. The leader of opponents was Stjepan Radić who demanded the creation of a South Slavs Confederacy in which there would be three heads of state: the Serbian king, the Croatian ban, and the president of the Slovenian national council. In his thinking, the confederacy was to have only ministers for foreign affairs, for defense and for the distribution of food. This proposition was rejected by the National Council of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs as an example of separatism.[4] The National Council, whose authority was in fact limited, feared that Serbia would simply annex the former Habsburg territories; on the other hand, the Italians were moving to take more territory than they had been allotted in London Pact.
Political opinion was divided, and Serbian ministers said that if Croats insisted on their own republic or a sort of independence, then Serbia would simply take areas inhabited by the Serbs and already controlled by the Serbian Army. After much debate and after Syrmia, which was under control of the Serbian army, declared secession, the National Council agreed to a unification with Serbia, although its declaration stated that the final organization of the state should be left to the future Constituent Assembly which would make final decisions only with a two-thirds majority.
With the acquiescence of the National Council achieved, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was declared on 1 December 1918 in Belgrade.[5]
Kingdom of Serbia

In the 1915 Serbian Campaign the Serbian Army suffered a complete defeat by the Central Powers and Serbia was overrun. Nevertheless, after recuperating on Corfu, the Serbians returned to combat in 1917 on the Macedonian front together with other Entente forces. Serbian and French forces began to defeat Austro-Hungarian and Bulgarian forces in the Vardar valley in September 1918 and, on 30 September 1918, Bulgaria surrendered. A month later in the Battle of Vittorio Veneto, the last Austro-Hungarian armies were defeated and the Empire was dissolved.
Serbian military forces quickly overran the territory of the Kingdom of Serbia (including the present-day Republic of Macedonia) as well as that of the Kingdom of Montenegro, Banat, Bačka and Baranja and Syrmia, but stopped on the borders of the other Habsburg territories that would form the short-lived State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, anticipating an official union between them and Serbia.

Territorial development of the Principality of Serbia and Kingdom of Serbia (1817–1913)
Serbia (1918) during military demarcation after WW1

Syrmia
After the collapse of Austria-Hungary, Syrmia became part of the newly formed State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs. On 29 October 1918 the Parliament of the Kingdom of Croatia-Slavonia (an autonomous kingdom within the Austro-Hungarian Empire) severed ties with Vienna and Budapest. On 5 November 1918 the town of Zemun invited the Serbian Royal Army to protect the city from the withdrawing forces of the Central Powers. On 24 November 1918 as per the decision of self-determination, local parliamentary deputies from the Serb-inhabited parts of Syrmia which historically corresponded to the Serbian Voivodship constituted a National Council in Ruma. Members from the western part of the county, mainly inhabited by ethnic Croats (Šokadija region), did not have representatives in this assembly. The National Council, fearing that unification would not be achieved and concerned that the leadership in Zagreb was facing numerous difficulties and was slow to act, decided to join in the creation of a common state of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. The Council decided in addition that, in the event that such a project of unification went unrealized, it would join the state as a part of the Serbian people's land.

Syrmia as part of Serbian Vojvodina (1848–1849)
County of Syrmia (1882–1918)

Banat, Bačka and Baranja

With the defeat of the Central Powers and the impending crumbling of the Austro-Hungarian Dual Monarchy, the monarchy collapsed and various regions were taken over by local self-styled National Councils beginning in the summer of 1918. Serb and other Slavic representatives founded the "Serb National Committee" in Novi Sad, which soon formed branches all across Banat, Bačka and Baranja in order to create a provisional administration. It particularly aimed at including other Slavs, most notably the Bunjevci. The Committee drafted a para-military militia, known as the "Serb National Guard", to secure its interests. Fearing that the troops would be too weak to face the Central powers, on 5 October 1918 the Pančevo local administration sent a plea to Belgrade for the protection of the Serbian Royal Army.
In Temeschwar on 1 November 1918 the local Social Democratic Party proclaimed a Banat Republic with the intention of preserving the Banat as a multi-ethnic region against Serbian and Romanian claims. The Republic was not able to achieve control over most of the territory it claimed, and, because the Belgrade Agreement of 15 November 1918 and previous Allied mandates to Serbia had mandated it to be taken over, the Serbian Army entered western and central parts of Banat (including Temeschwar) and abolished the republic; the Romanian army entered the eastern part of the region. Entire Bačka and Baranja were also handed over to provisional local Serbian administration that governed from Novi Sad: after welcoming the Serbian Army, the Serb National Committee proceeded to finish taking over the administration from Hungarian authorities. The Committee had previously formed rules to elect a National Council, which would decide about the self-determination of the majority people of the region, the Serbs (Slavs), as per the agreement with the provisional Hungarian government (which had broken off relations with Austria about a month before). All ethnic Slavs over the age of 20 had the right to vote. Democratic in spirit, the election introduced women's suffrage.
On 25 November 1918 the "Great People's Assembly of Serbs, Bunjevci and other Slavs from Banat, Bačka and Baranja", with 757 representatives elected in 211 municipalities, was constituted. 578 representatives were Serbs, 84 Bunjevci, 62 Slovaks, 21 Rusyns, 6 Germans, 3 Šokci, 2 Croats and 1 was Magyar. Two currents were opposed at the parliament, the Democratic and the Radical option. The weaker Democratic side wanted close ties to the State of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs, and as a compact part of the former South Slavic area of Austria-Hungary, they wanted to enter negotiations with the Kingdsom of Serbia; they emphasized the unity of the Yugoslavian people and rejected inner divisions among national groups. The Radicals under Jaša Tomić, on the other hand, argued that the three peoples had different cultural, religious and historical backgrounds and that, although a Yugoslavian state was inevitable, these peoples could not be treated as a single ethnic group, and thus that an immediate unconditional union with the Kingdom of Serbia was needed first to mark out an ethnic Serbian territory. In the end the Radical option won because of the fear that if union with Serbia was not realized immediately, Vojvodina might find itself outside of Serbia in the end. The parliament decided as well that the territories created under the ceasefire were permanent, and that they were to be merged into the Kingdom of Serbia. It proclaimed itself the provisional legislative body for the regions and elected a provisional executive body, the People's Administration for Banat, Bačka and Baranja, under Dr. Jovan Lalošević. Although government in Belgrade accepted the decision of unification of this region with Serbia, it never officially recognized newly formed provincial administration.
After the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was proclaimed, the National Council elected its share of members of the Provisional National Representorship of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. Baranja became a hideout for communist and other refugees from Miklós Horthy's White Terror. The Treaty of Trianon had assigned most of the Baranja region to Hungary, which led to massive protest and a group of people under painter Petar Dobrović to proclaim a Serb-Hungarian Baranya-Baja Republic. This Republic lasted only a few days, and on 25 August 1921 it was invaded and annexed by Hungary, in accordance with Hungarian borders defined by the Treaty of Trianon. The Treaty of Trianon assigned to Hungary some of the most northern territories under Serbian control, in which a minority of South Slavs remained. On the other hand, sizable German and Magyar minorities were left within the Kingdom's borders. Central Banat was granted to Romania, as the region was divided on ethnic grounds, so as to contain a majority of the populations, leaving a minority of Yugoslavs in Romania and a minority of Romanians in the Kingdom of SCS. The BBB region remained a historical entity in the united realm until 1922 when a new administration was adopted in accordance to the unitary system. The region was split among the Bačka (with center in Novi Sad), Belgrade and Podunavlje (with center in Smederevo) administrative areas. When the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was proclaimed in 1929, most of the region eventually became a part of the Danubian Banate, with a small part going to the City of Belgrade.

Banat Republic (1918)
Region of Banat, Bačka and Baranja that proclaimed unification with Serbia
parts of Banat, Bačka and Baranja recognized as a territory of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes at a 1919–1920 Paris Peace Conference

Montenegro

Montenegro was originally created by the national-romantic desire of liberation the lands which belonged to the State of Zeta, later of unification of South Slavic lands, and remained conservative in its ideology as compared with the other parts of the future Yugoslavia. In 1848 Prince-Bishop Petar II Petrović-Njegoš accepted the Zagreb-inspired proposal of the Serbian government to create a common state of all southern Slavs known as "Yugoslavia" and cooperated on the matter, but requested first a unification of the Serbs unification and later one with Bulgarians and Croats. In 1907 parliamentarism was born in Montenegro, and the first political party, the People's Party, expressed the need to cooperate and bond with other Slavic peoples, along with Serbian national unification and liberation. Entering gradually into periods of cold relations with Serbia and disappointed that he and his country had lost the primate in the Serb revolution, HRH Nicholas I of Montenegro accepted union with Serbia and in 1914 initiated the process, which was however interrupted by World War I; he also accepted the idea of a Yugoslavian realm.

Shortly after entering the war on the side of Serbia to support escape of Serbian army toward Greece, the Kingdom of Montenegro was occupied by Austro-Hungarian military forces in early 1916. During exile Serbia and all other Allied powers recognised the King's government-in-exile as the government of Montenegro. In the spring of 1916 the King proclaimed Andrija Radović as prime minister, but he resigned a few months after his proposal of union with Serbia was rejected. He created in 1917 the National Committee for Unification with Serbia, which found support from Nikola Pašić's Serbian Government. In 1918 the Allies took control of Montenegro and mandated a common mission for its occupation. On 15 October 1918 the Government of Serbia named a "Central Executive Committee for Unification of Serbia and Montenegro" that would organize the process of unification. Ten days later the Committee decided to schedule a nationwide election with new election laws.
With this decision against the Montenegrin constitution, the committee created by Serbia had abolished the Montenegrin parliament and reversed the order of the King for a session of the parliament on first day after an armistice was signed.[6] The official reason for this decision was that 2/5 of the parliament members were abroad, making it necessary to elect new ones.[6] An election was held without a list of eligible voters,[7] and the vote was reportedly controlled by officials from Serbia.[6]  The Podgorica Assembly (formally the Great National Assembly of the Serb People in Montenegro) elected in that way and encircled by detachments of the Serbian army[8] decided on 26 November 1918 to dethrone the King and the House of Petrovic-Njegos in favor of the House of Karadjordjevic and to unite with Serbia, pending a common state of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.
The Podgorica Assembly elected a provisional executive body known as the "Montenegrin Committee for Unity with Serbia" under Marko Daković which oversaw Montenegro's integration, until the SCS's government took over on 23 April 1919. The Assembly also elected its share of representatives into the Provisional National Representorship of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes.
Reaction to these events escalated in early 1919 into the Christmas Uprising by opponents of annexation. International leaders opposed the uprising and the Serbian forces violently quelled the rebellion.[9]
Bulgaria

Bulgaria fought on the side of the Central Powers during World War I which lost the war. Initially, the Allies had attempted to persuade the country to join the Allies by having Serbia cede large parts of Macedonia to Bulgaria in exchange for gaining Bosnia-Herzegovina and an outlet to the sea in the Treaty of London in 1915. The Serbian government was unwilling to officially confirm this offer and Bulgaria eventually joined the Central Powers. However, by the end of the war, many Bulgarian politicians became interested in joining the newly formed Yugoslav state alongside extant Bulgarian supporters of a united South Slavic state such as Aleksandar Stamboliski. Their reasons included to avoid paying war reparations for having fought the Allies, and to unite with their ethnic brethren in Macedonia. One initial plan considered by the Serbian leadership was to accept the Treaty of London 1915 in which Serbia gained Bosnia-Herzegovina, Slavonia, and Southern Dalmatia and cede Macedonia to Bulgaria, and then constitute a Yugoslav state between Serbia and Bulgaria. Under this proposal, the largely Croat and Slovene areas would remain part of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy and would be liberated at a future date. This plan never materialized, partly because the Allies decided to scrap the Treaty of London in favor of self-determination and partly because the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy itself collapsed leaving all the South Slav areas free to join a Yugoslav state.
Aftermath

A plebiscite was also held in the Province of Carinthia, which opted to remain in Austria. The Dalmatian port city of Zara (Zadar) and a few of the Dalmatian islands were given to Italy. The city of Fiume (Rijeka) was declared to be the Free State of Fiume, but it was soon occupied by the Italian poet and revolutionary Gabriele D'Annunzio for several months. Turned into a "free state", Fiume was annexed with Italy through a bilateral agreement between Rome and Belgrade in 1924. Tensions over the border with Italy continued, however. Italy claimed other parts of the Dalmatian coast (from which the majority of the Italian-Venetian population escaped in 1919–1922), whereas Yugoslavia claimed Istria, a part of the former Austrian Littoral which had been united with Italy as part of the former Venetian Republic, and
whose main cities had been inhabited by Italian-Venetian people, but whose rural population consisted of South Slavs (Croats and Slovenes).
Notes

, Henry Baerlain, 1922, L. Parsons, London
, Henry Baerlain, 1922, L. Parsons, London
 by Richard Weber (in German)
 by Mijat Šuković (in Serbian)

See also
Adriatic Question
Kingdom of Yugoslavia
Yugoslavia

vtTimeline of Yugoslav statehoodPre–19181918–19291929–19451941–19451945–19461946–19631963–19921992–20032003–20062006–20082008–SloveniaPart of Austria-Hungary including the
Bay of KotorSee alsoKingdom of
Croatia-Slavonia
1868–1918Kingdom of Dalmatia
1815–1918Condominium of
Bosnia and
Herzegovina
1878–1918Kingdom ofSerbs,
Croats and Slovenes
(1918–1929)

Kingdomof Yugoslavia
(1929–1945)See alsoState of Slovenes, Croats and Serbs
1918Republic of Prekmurje
1919Banat, Bačka and Baranja
1918–1919Free State of Fiume
1920–1924
1924–1945Italian province of Zadar
1920–1947Annexed bya
Fascist Italy and
Nazi GermanyDemocraticFederal Yugoslavia
1945–1946

FederalPeople's Republicof Yugoslavia
1946–1963

SocialistFederal Republicof Yugoslavia
1963–1992Consisted of the
Socialist Republics ofSlovenia (1945–1991)
Croatia (1945–1991)
Bosniaand Herzegovina (1945–1992)Serbia (1945–1992)
(included the autonomous
provinces of Vojvodina and Kosovo)Montenegro (1945–1992)
Macedonia (1945–1991)See alsoFree Territory of Trieste (1947–1954) jRepublic of Slovenia
Ten-Day WarDalmatiaIndependent State of Croatia
1941–1945Puppet state of Nazi Germany.
Parts annexed by Fascist Italy.
Međimurje and Baranja annexed by Hungary.Republic of Croatiab
Croatian War of IndependenceSlavoniaCroatiaBosniaBosnia and Herzegovinac
Bosnian WarConsists of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1995–present),
Republika Srpska (1995–present) and Brčko District (2000–present).HerzegovinaVojvodinaPart of the Délvidékregion ofHungaryAutonomous Banatd (part of the German
Territory of the
Military Commander
in Serbia) Federal Republic of YugoslaviaConsisted of the
Republic of Serbia (1992–2006)
and
Republic of Montenegro (1992–2006) State Union of Serbia and Montenegro Republicof SerbiaIncluded the autonomous provinces of Vojvodina and, under UN administration, Kosovo and Metohija Republic of SerbiaIncludes the autonomous province of VojvodinaSerbiaKingdom of Serbia
1882–1918Territory of the MilitaryCommander inSerbia
1941–1944eKosovoPart of the Kingdom of Serbia
1912–1918Mostlyannexed by Albania
1941–1944 along with western Macedonia and south-eastern Montenegro Republic of KosovogMetohijaKingdom of Montenegro
1910–1918Metohija controlled by Austria-Hungary 1915–1918MontenegroProtectorate of Montenegrof
1941–1944MontenegroNorth MacedoniaPart of the Kingdom of Serbia
1912–1918Annexed by the Kingdom of Bulgaria
1941–1944Republic of North Macedoniah
a Prekmurje annexed by Hungary.
b See also SAO Kninska Krajina (1990) → SAO Krajina(1990–1991); and SAO Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Syrmia(1990–1991), SAO Western Slavonia(1990–1991) and the Republic of Serbian Krajina(1990–1995), all replaced by the UN Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium(1996–1998).
c See also Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia; and the Serbian Autonomous Oblasts (SAOs) of Bosanska Krajina, North-East Bosnia, Romanija and Herzegovina (1991–1992), which all combined to form the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992–1995).
d Bačka was reannexed by Hungary (1941–1944), while Syrmia was annexed by the Independent State of Croatia (1941–1944).
e See also Republic of Užice.
f Annexed by Fascist Italy (1941–1943) and Nazi Germany (1943–1944). Smaller part annexed by the Independent State of Croatia (1941–1944).
g Kosovo is the subject of a territorial dispute between the Republic of Kosovo and the Republic of Serbia. The Republic of Kosovo unilaterally declared independence on 17 February 2008, but Serbia continues to claim it as part of its own sovereign territory. The two governments began to normalise relations in 2013, as part of the 2013 Brussels Agreement. Kosovo has been recognized as an independent state by 112 out of 193 United Nations member states, while 12 states have recognized Kosovo only to later withdraw their recognition.
h North Macedonia was known as the Republic of Macedonia until 2019. It is known in the United Nations as the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia because of a naming dispute with Greece.
j Free Territory was established in 1947.  Its administration was divided into two areas (Zone A) and (Zone B). Free Territory was de facto taken over by Italy and SFRY in 1954.


Bánh mì or banh mi (/ˈbɑːn ˌmiː/,[1][2][3][4] /ˈbæn/;[5][4] Vietnamese:[ɓǎjŋ̟ mî]) refers to a kind of sandwich that consists of a Vietnamese single-serving baguette, also called bánh mì in Vietnamese, which is split lengthwise and filled with various savory ingredients.
A typical Vietnamese sandwich is a fusion of meats and vegetables from native Vietnamese cuisine such as chả lụa (pork sausage), coriander leaf (cilantro), cucumber, and pickled carrots ,
cabbage , and daikon combined with condiments from French cuisine such as pâté, along with jalapeño and mayonnaise.[6] However,  a wide variety of popular fillings are used, from xíu mại to ice cream. In Vietnam, sandwiches are typically eaten for breakfast or as a snack; they are considered too dry for lunch or dinner.[7]
The baguette was introduced to Vietnam in the mid–19th century, when Vietnam was part of French Indochina, and became a staple food by the early 20th century. During the 1950s, a distinctly Vietnamese style of sandwich developed in Saigon, becoming a popular street food. Following the Vietnam War, Overseas Vietnamese popularized the bánh mì sandwich in countries such as the United States.
Terminology

In Vietnamese, the word bánh mì is derived from bánh (which can refer to many kinds of food, primarily baked goods, including bread) and mì (wheat). It may also be spelled bánh mỳ in northern Vietnam. Taken alone, bánh mì means "bread", but is understood to be the Vietnamese baguette. Via synecdoche, it may also refer to a sandwich, with the term bánh mì kẹp being used to disambiguate. In particular, bánh mì often refers to the sandwiches made on Vietnamese baguettes, which may be called bánh mì Sài Gòn, after the city in which they were popularized. However, even in Vietnam, "a bánh mì for breakfast" implies a meat-filled sandwich for breakfast, not just bread.
A folk etymology claims that the word bánh mì is a corruption of the French pain de mie, meaning soft, white bread.[8] However, bánh or its Nôm form 餅 has referred to rice cakes and other pastries since as early as the 13th century, centuries before French contact.[9]
History

The word bánh mì, meaning "bread", is attested in Vietnamese as early as the 1830s, in Jean-Louis Taberd's dictionary Dictionarium Latino-Annamiticum.[10] French colonists introduced Vietnam to the baguette, along with other baked goods such as pâté chaud, in the 1860s, when Vietnam was part of French Indochina.[11][7] Northern Vietnamese initially called the baguette bánh tây, literally "Western bánh", while southern Vietnamese called it bánh mì, "wheat bánh".[12][13] Nguyễn Đình Chiểu mentions the baguette in his 1861 poem "Văn tế nghĩa sĩ Cần Giuộc". Due to the price of imported wheat at the time, French baguettes and sandwiches were considered luxury items. During World War I, an influx of French soldiers and supplies arrived. At the same time, disruptions of wheat imports led bakers to begin mixing in inexpensive rice flour (which also made the bread fluffier). As a result, for ordinary Vietnamese to enjoy French staples such as bread became possible.[14][15][13] Many shops baked twice a day, because bread tends to go stale more quickly in the Vietnamese climate. Baguettes were mainly eaten for breakfast with some butter and sugar.[7]

Until the 1950s, sandwiches hewed closely to French tastes, typically a jambon-beurre moistened with a mayonnaise or liver pâté spread.[14][15][7][16] The 1954 Partition of Vietnam sent over a million migrants from North Vietnam to South Vietnam, transforming Saigon's local cuisine.[12] Among the migrants were Lê Minh Ngọc and Nguyễn Thị Tịnh, who opened a small bakery named Hòa Mã in District 3. In 1958, Hòa Mã became one of the first shops to sell bánh mì thịt.[14][17][18] Around this time, another migrant from the North began selling chả sandwiches from a basket on a mobylette,[19] and a stand in Gia Định Province (present-day Phú Nhuận District) began selling phá lấu sandwiches.[20] Some shops stuffed sandwiches with inexpensive Cheddar cheese, which came from French food aid that migrants from the North had rejected.[7] Vietnamese communities in France also began selling bánh mì.[13]
After the Fall of Saigon in 1975, bánh mì sandwiches became a luxury item once again.[12] During the so-called "subsidy period", state-owned phở eateries often served bread or cold rice as a side dish, leading to the present-day practice of dipping quẩy in phở.[21] In the 1980s, Đổi Mới market reforms led to a renaissance in bánh mì, mostly as street food.[12]
Meanwhile, Vietnamese Americans brought bánh mì sandwiches to cities across the United States. In Northern California, Lê Văn Bá and his sons are credited with popularizing bánh mì among Vietnamese and non-Vietnamese Americans alike through their food truck services provider and their fast-food chain, Lee's Sandwiches, beginning in the 1980s.[13] Sometimes bánh mì was likened to local sandwiches. In New Orleans, a "Vietnamese po' boy" recipe won the 2009 award for best po' boy at the annual Oak Street Po-Boy Festival.[22] A restaurant in Philadelphia also sells a similar sandwich, marketed as a "Vietnamese hoagie".[23]
Bánh mì sandwiches were featured in the 2002 PBS documentary Sandwiches That You Will Like. The word bánh mì was added to the Oxford English Dictionary on 24 March 2011.[24][25] As of 2017, bánh mì is included in about 2% of U.S. restaurant sandwich menus, a nearly fivefold increase from 2013.[26]
Ingredients
Bread

A Vietnamese baguette has a thin crust and white, airy crumb. It may consist of both wheat flour and rice flour.[14]
Besides being made into a sandwich, it is eaten alongside meat dishes, such as bò kho (a beef stew), curry, and phá lấu. It can also be dipped in condensed milk (see Sữa Ông Thọ).
Fillings

A bánh mì sandwich typically consists of one or more meats, accompanying vegetables, and condiments. Common fillings include steamed, pan-roasted or oven-roasted seasoned pork belly, Vietnamese sausage, grilled pork, grilled pork patties, spreadable pork liver pâté, pork floss, grilled chicken, chicken floss, canned sardines in tomato sauce, soft pork meatballs in tomato sauce (xíu mại), head cheese, mock duck, and tofu. Accompanying vegetables typically include fresh cucumber slices, cilantro (leaves of the coriander plant) and pickled carrots and white radishes in shredded form (đồ chua). Common condiments include spicy chili sauce, sliced chilis, Maggi seasoning sauce, and mayonnaise.[11][13]
Varieties
As with Western sandwiches,  a wide variety of popular bánh mì fillings are used. A typical bánh mì shop in the United States offers at least 10 varieties.[27]
The most popular variety of Vietnamese sandwich is bánh mì thịt, thịt meaning "meat". Bánh mì thịt nguội (also known as bánh mì pâté chả thịt, bánh mì đặc biệt, or "special combo") is made with various Vietnamese cold cuts, such as sliced pork or pork belly, chả lụa (pork sausage), and head cheese, along with the liver pâté and vegetables like carrot or cucumbers.[28][12][29][30]
Other varieties include:
Bánh mì bì (shredded pork sandwich)– shredded pork or pork skin, doused with fish sauce
Bánh mì chà bông (pork floss sandwich)
Bánh mì xíu mại (minced pork meatball sandwich)– smashed pork meatballs
Bánh mì cá mòi (sardine sandwich)
Bánh mì pa-tê (pâté sandwich)
Bánh mì xá xíu or bánh mì thịt nướng (barbecue pork sandwich)
Bánh mì chả lụa or bánh mì giò lụa (pork sausage sandwich)
Bánh mì gà nướng (grilled chicken sandwich)
Bánh mì chay (vegetarian sandwich)– made with tofu or seitan; in Vietnam, usually made at Buddhist temples during special religious events, but uncommon on the streets
Bánh mì chả cá (fish patty sandwich)
Bánh mì bơ (margarine sandwich)– margarine and sugar
Bánh mì trứng ốp-la (fried egg sandwich)– contains fried eggs with onions, sprinkled with soy sauce, sometimes buttered; served for breakfast in Vietnam
Bánh mì kẹp kem (ice cream sandwich)– contains scoops of ice cream topped with crushed peanuts[31]

Bánh mì đặc biệt ("special combo" sandwich)
Bánh mì bì (shredded pork sandwich) at  Eden Center
Bánh mì xíu mại (minced pork meatball sandwich)
Bánh mì thịt nướng (barbecue pork sandwich)

The Vietnamese bánh mì sandwich has been adapted to Lao cuisine as khao chī (Lao: ເຂົ້າຈີ່) and to Cambodian cuisine as num pang (Khmer: នំបុ័ង).[16]
Notable vendors

Prior to the Fall of Saigon in 1975, well-known South Vietnamese bánh mì vendors included Bánh mì Ba Lẹ and Bánh mì Như Lan (which opened in 1968[14]).
In regions of the United States with significant populations of Vietnamese Americans, numerous bakeries and fast food restaurants specialize in bánh mì. Lee's Sandwiches, a fast food chain with locations in several states, specializes in Vietnamese sandwiches served on French baguettes (or traditional bánh mì at some locations) as well as Western-style sandwiches served on croissants. In New Orleans, Dong Phuong Oriental Bakery is known for the bánh mì bread that it distributes to restaurants throughout the city. After 1975, Ba Lẹ owner Võ Văn Lẹ fled to the United States and, along with Lâm Quốc Thanh, founded Bánh mì Ba Lê. The Eden Center shopping center in Northern Virginia has several well-known bakeries specializing in bánh mì.[11]
Mainstream fast food chains have also incorporated bánh mì and other Vietnamese dishes into their portfolios. Yum! Brands operates a chain of bánh mì cafés called Bánh Shop.[13] The former Chipotle-owned ShopHouse Southeast Asian Kitchen chain briefly sold bánh mì. Jack in the Box offers a "bánh mì–inspired" fried chicken sandwich as part of its Food Truck Series.[32] McDonald's and Paris Baguette locations in Vietnam offer bánh mì.[33][34]
See also

List of sandwiches
Vietnamese cuisine

What kind of bread is used for a Bahn Mi?


Lithuanian (Lithuanian: lietuvių kalba) is a Baltic language spoken in the Baltic region. It is the language of Lithuanians and the official language of Lithuania as well as one of the official languages of the European Union. There are about 2.9 million[3] native Lithuanian speakers in Lithuania and about 200,000 abroad.
As a Baltic language, Lithuanian is closely related to neighbouring Latvian and more distantly to Slavic, Germanic and other Indo-European languages. It is written in a Latin alphabet.  Lithuanian is often said to be the most conservative living Indo-European language, retaining features of Proto-Indo-European now lost in other languages.[4]
History

Among Indo-European languages, Lithuanian is conservative in some aspects of its grammar and phonology, retaining archaic features otherwise found only in ancient languages such as Sanskrit[5] (particularly its early form, Vedic Sanskrit) or Ancient Greek. For this reason, it is an important source for the reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European language despite its late attestation (with the earliest texts dating only to c. 1500).[6]
Lithuanian was studied by linguists such as Franz Bopp, August Schleicher, Adalbert Bezzenberger, Louis Hjelmslev,[7] Ferdinand de Saussure,[8] Winfred P. Lehmann and Vladimir Toporov[9] and others.
The Proto-Balto-Slavic languages branched off directly from Proto-Indo-European, then sub-branched into Proto-Baltic and Proto-Slavic. Proto-Baltic branched off into Proto-West Baltic and Proto-East Baltic.[10] Baltic languages passed through a Proto-Balto-Slavic stage, from which Baltic languages retain numerous exclusive and non-exclusive lexical, morphological, phonological and accentual isoglosses in common with the Slavic languages, which represent their closest living Indo-European relatives. Moreover, with Lithuanian being so archaic in phonology, Slavic words can often be deduced from Lithuanian by regular sound laws; for example, Lith. vilkas and Polish wilk ← PBSl. *wilkas (cf. PSl. *vьlkъ) ← PIE *wĺ̥kʷos, all meaning "wolf".
According to some glottochronological speculations,[11][12] the Eastern Baltic languages split from the Western Baltic ones between AD400 and 600. The Greek geographer Ptolemy had already written of two Baltic tribe/nations by name, the Galindai and Sudinoi (Γαλίνδαι, Σουδινοί) in the 2nd century AD. The differentiation between Lithuanian and Latvian started after 800; for a long period, they could be considered dialects of a single language. At a minimum, transitional dialects existed until the 14th or 15th century and perhaps as late as the 17th century. Also, the 13th- and 14th-century occupation of the western part of the Daugava basin (closely coinciding with the territory of modern Latvia) by the German Sword Brethren had a significant influence on the languages' independent development.
The earliest surviving written Lithuanian text is a translation dating from about 1503–1525 of the Lord's Prayer, the Hail Mary, and the Nicene Creed written in the Southern Aukštaitian dialect. Printed books existed after 1547, but the level of literacy among Lithuanians was low through the 18th century, and books were not commonly available.  In 1864, following the January Uprising, Mikhail Muravyov, the Russian Governor General of Lithuania, banned the language in education and publishing and barred use of the Latin alphabet altogether, although books printed in Lithuanian continued to be printed across the border in East Prussia and in the United States. Brought into the country by book smugglers despite the threat of stiff prison sentences, they helped fuel a growing nationalist sentiment that finally led to the lifting of the ban in 1904.
Jonas Jablonskis (1860–1930) made significant contributions to the formation of the standard Lithuanian language. The conventions of written Lithuanian had been evolving during the 19th century, but Jablonskis, in the introduction to his Lietuviškos kalbos gramatika, was the first to formulate and expound the essential principles that were so indispensable to its later development. His proposal for Standard Lithuanian was based on his native Western Aukštaitijan dialect with some features of the eastern Prussian Lithuanians' dialect spoken in Lithuania Minor. These dialects  had preserved archaic phonetics mostly intact due to the influence of the neighbouring Old Prussian language, while the other dialects had experienced different phonetic shifts. Lithuanian has been the official language of Lithuania since 1918. During the Soviet era (see History of Lithuania), it was used in official discourse along with Russian, which, as the official language of the USSR, took precedence over Lithuanian.[13]
Classification

Lithuanian is one of two living Baltic languages, along with Latvian. An earlier Baltic language, Old Prussian, was extinct by the 18th century; the other Western Baltic languages, Curonian and Sudovian, became extinct earlier. Some theories, such as that of Jānis Endzelīns, considered that the Baltic languages form their own distinct branch of the family of Indo-European languages, but the most widely accepted opinion is the one that suggests the union of Baltic and Slavic languages into a distinct sub-family of Balto-Slavic languages amongst the Indo-European family of languages. Such an opinion was first represented by the likes of August Schleicher, and to a certain extent, Antoine Meillet. Endzelīns thought that the similarity between Baltic and Slavic was explicable through language contact while Schleicher, Meillet and others argued for a genetic kinship between the two families.
An attempt to reconcile the opposing stances was made by Jan Michał Rozwadowski. He proposed that the two language groups were indeed a unity after the division of Indo-European, but also suggested that after the two had divided into separate entities (Baltic and Slavic), they had posterior contact. The genetic kinship view is augmented by the fact that Proto-Balto-Slavic is easily reconstructible with important proofs in historic prosody. The alleged (or certain, as certain as historic linguistics can be) similarities due to contact are seen in such phenomena as the existence of definite adjectives formed by the addition of an inflected pronoun (descended from the same Proto-Indo-European pronoun), which exist in both Baltic and Slavic yet nowhere else in the Indo-European family (languages such as Albanian and the Germanic languages developed definite adjectives independently), and that are not reconstructible for Proto-Balto-Slavic, meaning that they most probably developed through language contact.
The Baltic hydronyms area stretches from the Vistula River in the west to the east of Moscow and from the Baltic Sea in the north to the south of Kiev.[14][15] Vladimir Toporov and Oleg Trubachyov (1961, 1962) studied Baltic hydronyms in the Russian and Ukrainian territory.[16] Hydronyms and archeology analysis show that the Slavs started migrating to the Baltic areas east and north-east directions in the 6-7th centuries, before then, the Baltic and Slavic boundary was south of the Pripyat River.[17] In the 1960s Vladimir Toporov and Vyacheslav Ivanov made the following conclusions about the relationship between the Baltic and Slavic languages: a) Proto-Slavic language formed from the peripheral-type Baltic dialects; b) Slavic linguistic type formed later from the Baltic languages structural model; c) the Slavic structural model is a result of the Baltic languages structural model transformation. These scholars’ theses do not contradict the Baltic and Slavic languages closeness and from a historical perspective specify the Baltic-Slavic languages evolution.[18][19]
Geographic distribution
Lithuanian is spoken mainly in Lithuania. It is also spoken by ethnic Lithuanians living in today's Belarus, Latvia, Poland, and the Kaliningrad Oblast of Russia, as well as by sizable emigrant communities in Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay, and Spain.
2,955,200 people in Lithuania (including 3,460 Tatars), or about 86% of the 2015 population, are native Lithuanian speakers; most Lithuanian inhabitants of other nationalities also speak Lithuanian to some extent. The total worldwide Lithuanian-speaking population is about 3,200,000.
Official status
Lithuanian is the state language of Lithuania and an official language of the European Union.
Dialects

The Lithuanian language has two dialects: Aukštaičių (Aukštaitian, Highland Lithuanian) and Žemaičių/Žemaitiu (Samogitian, Lowland Lithuanian). There are significant differences between standard Lithuanian and Samogitian. The modern Samogitian dialect formed in the 13th–16th centuries under the influence of the Curonian language. Lithuanian dialects are closely connected with ethnographical regions of Lithuania.
Dialects are divided into subdialects. Both dialects have three subdialects. Samogitian is divided into West, North and South; Aukštaitian into West (Suvalkiečiai), South (Dzūkai) and East.
Standard Lithuanian is derived mostly from Western Aukštaitian dialects, including the Eastern dialect of Lithuania Minor. Influence of other dialects is more significant in the vocabulary of standard Lithuanian.
Script

Lithuanian uses the Latin script supplemented with diacritics. It has 32 letters. In the collation order, y follows immediately after į (called i nosinė), because both y and į represent the same long vowel [iː]:

In addition, the following digraphs are used, but are treated as sequences of two letters for collation purposes. The digraph ch represents a single sound, the velar fricative [x], while dz and dž are pronounced like straightforward combinations of their component letters (sounds):
Dz dz [dz] (dzė), Dž dž [dʒ] (džė), Ch ch [x] (cha).
The Lithuanian writing system is largely phonemic, i.e., one letter usually corresponds to a single phoneme (sound). There are a few exceptions: for example, the letter i represents either the vowel [ɪ], as in the English sit, or is silent and merely indicates that the preceding consonant is palatalized. The latter is largely the case when i occurs after a consonant and is followed by a back or a central vowel, except in some borrowed words (e.g., the first consonant in lūpa [ˈɫûːpɐ], "lip", is a velarized dental lateral approximant; on the other hand, the first consonant in liūtas [ˈlʲuːt̪ɐs̪], "lion", is a palatalized alveolar lateral approximant; both consonants are followed by the same vowel, the long [uː], and no [ɪ] can be pronounced in liūtas). Before the 20th century, due to the Lithuanian press ban, Lithuanian alphabet included the Polish Ł for the first sound and regular L (without a following i) for the second: łupa, lutas.
A macron (on u), an ogonek (on a, e, i, and u), and y (in place of i) are used for grammatical and historical reasons and always denote vowel length in Modern Standard Lithuanian. Acute, grave, and tilde diacritics are used to indicate pitch accents. However, these pitch accents are generally not written, except in dictionaries, grammars, and where needed for clarity, such as to differentiate homonyms and dialectal use.
Phonology

Consonants

All Lithuanian consonants except /j/ have two variants: the non-palatalized one represented by the IPA symbols in the chart, and the palatalized one (i.e. /b/– /bʲ/, /d/– /dʲ/, /ɡ/– /ɡʲ/, and so on). The consonants /f/, /x/, /ɣ/ and their palatalized variants are only found in loanwords.
/t͡ɕ, d͡ʑ, ɕ, ʑ/ have been traditionally transcribed with ⟨t͡ʃʲ, d͡ʒʲ, ʃʲ, ʒʲ⟩, but they can be seen as equivalent transcriptions, with the former set being somewhat easier to write.[21]
Vowels
Lithuanian has six long vowels and five short ones (not including a disputed phoneme marked in brackets). Length has traditionally been considered the distinctive feature, though short vowels are also more centralized and long vowels more peripheral:

/e, ɔ/ are restricted to loanwords. Many speakers merge the former with /ɛ/.[22]
Diphthongs
Lithuanian is traditionally described as having nine diphthongs, ai, au, ei, eu, oi, ou, ui, ie, and uo. However, some approaches (i.e., Schmalstieg 1982) treat them as vowel sequences rather than diphthongs; indeed, the longer component depends on the type of stress, whereas in diphthongs, the longer segment is fixed.

Pitch accent

The Lithuanian prosodic system is characterized by free accent and distinctive quantity. Its accentuation is sometimes described as a simple tone system, often called pitch accent.[24] In lexical words, one syllable will be tonically prominent. A heavy syllable—that is, a syllable containing a long vowel, diphthong, or a sonorant coda—may have one of two tones, falling tone (or acute tone) or rising tone (or circumflex tone). Light syllables (syllables with short vowels and optionally also obstruent codas) do not have the two-way contrast of heavy syllables.
Grammar

Lithuanian is a highly inflected language in which the relationships between parts of speech and their roles in a sentence are expressed by numerous inflections.
In Lithuanian, there are two grammatical genders for nouns– masculine and feminine, and there are three genders for adjectives, pronouns, numerals and participles: masculine, feminine and neuter. Every attribute has to follow the gender and the number of the noun. The neuter forms of other parts of speech are used with a subject of an undefined gender (a pronoun, an infinitive etc.).
There are twelve noun and five adjective declensions and one (masculine and feminine) participle declension.[25]
Nouns and other parts of nominal morphology are declined in seven cases: nominative, genitive, dative, accusative, instrumental, locative, and vocative. In older Lithuanian texts three additional varieties of the locative case are found: illative, adessive and allative. The most common are the illative, which still is used, mostly in spoken language, and the allative, which survives in the standard language in some idiomatic usages. The adessive is nearly extinct. These additional cases are probably due to the influence of Uralic languages with which Baltic languages have had a long-standing contact (Uralic languages have a great variety of noun cases, a number of which are specialised locative cases).
Lithuanian has a free, mobile stress, and is also characterized by pitch accent.
The Lithuanian verbal morphology shows a number of innovations. Namely, the loss of synthetic passive (which is hypothesized based on the more archaic though long-extinct Indo-European languages), synthetic perfect (formed via the means of reduplication) and aorist; forming subjunctive and imperative with the use of suffixes plus flexions as opposed to solely flections in, e. g., Ancient Greek; loss of the optative mood; merging and disappearing of the -t- and -nt- markers for third person singular and plural, respectively (this, however, occurs in Latvian and Old Prussian as well and may indicate a collective feature of all Baltic languages).
On the other hand, the Lithuanian verbal morphology retains a number of archaic features absent from most modern Indo-European languages (but shared with Latvian). This includes the synthetic formation of the future tense with the help of the -s- suffix; three principal verbal forms with the present tense stem employing the -n- and -st- infixes.
There are three verbal conjugations. The verb būti is the only auxiliary verb in the language. Together with participles, it is used to form dozens of compound forms.
In the active voice, each verb can be inflected for any of the following moods:
Indicative
Indirect
Imperative
Conditional/subjunctive
In the indicative mood and indirect moods, all verbs can have eleven tenses:
simple: present (nešu), past (nešiau), past iterative (nešdavau) and future (nešiu)
compound:
present perfect (esu nešęs), past perfect (buvau nešęs), past iterative perfect (būdavau nešęs), future perfect (būsiu nešęs)
past inchoative (buvau benešąs), past iterative inchoative (būdavau benešąs), future inchoative (būsiu benešąs)
The indirect mood, used only in written narrative speech, has the same tenses corresponding to the appropriate active participle in nominative case, e. g. past of the indirect mood would be nešęs, past iterative inchoative of the indirect mood would be būdavęs benešąs. Since it is a nominal form, this mood cannot be conjugated, but must match the subject's number and gender.
The subjunctive (or conditional)  and the imperative moods have three tenses. Subjunctive: present (neščiau), past (būčiau nešęs), inchoative (būčiau benešąs); imperative: present (nešk), perfect (būk nešęs) and inchoative (būk benešąs).
The infinitive has only one form (nešti). These forms, except the infinitive and indirect mood, are conjugative, having two singular, two plural persons and the third person form common both for plural and singular.
In the passive voice, the form number is not as rich as in the active voice. There are two types of passive voice in Lithuanian: present participle (type I) ant past participle (type II) (in the examples below types I and II are separated with a slash). They both have the same moods and tenses:
Indicative mood: present (esu nešamas/neštas), past (buvau nešamas/neštas), past iterative (būdavau nešamas/neštas) and future (būsiu nešamas/neštas)
Indirect mood: present (esąs nešamas/neštas), past (buvęs nešamas/neštas), past iterative (būdavęs nešamas/neštas) and future (būsiąs nešamas/neštas).
Imperative mood: present (type I only: būk nešamas), past (type II only: būk neštas).
Subjunctive / conditional mood: present (type I only: būčiau nešamas), past (type II only: būčiau neštas).
Lithuanian has the richest participle system of all Indo-European languages, having participles derived from all simple tenses with distinct active and passive forms, and two gerund forms.
In practical terms, the rich overall inflectional system makes the word order have a different meaning than in more analytic languages such as English. The English phrase "a car is coming" translates as "atvažiuoja automobilis" (the rheme first), while "the car is coming" – "automobilis atvažiuoja" (the theme first; word order inversion).
Lithuanian also has a very rich word derivation system and an array of diminutive suffixes.
The first prescriptive grammar book of Lithuanian was commissioned by the Duke of Prussia, Frederick William, for use in the Lithuanian-speaking parishes of East-Prussia. It was written in Latin and German by Daniel Klein and published in Königsberg in 1653/1654. The first scientific Compendium of Lithuanian language was published in German in 1856/57 by August Schleicher, a professor at Prague University. In it he describes Prussian-Lithuanian which later is to become the "skeleton" (Būga) of modern Lithuanian.
Today there are two definitive books on Lithuanian grammar: one in English, the "Introduction to Modern Lithuanian" (called "Beginner's Lithuanian" in its newer editions) by Leonardas Dambriūnas, Antanas Klimas and William R. Schmalstieg, and another in Russian, Vytautas Ambrazas' "Грамматика литовского языка" ("The Grammar of the Lithuanian Language"). Another recent book on Lithuanian grammar is the second edition of "Review of Modern Lithuanian Grammar" by Edmund Remys, published by Lithuanian Research and Studies Center, Chicago, 2003.
Vocabulary

Indo-European vocabulary
Lithuanian retains cognates to many words found in classical languages, such as Sanskrit and Latin. These words are descended from Proto-Indo-European. A few examples are the following:
Lith. and Skt. sūnus (son)
Lith. and Skt. avis and Lat. ovis (sheep)
Lith. dūmas and Skt. dhūmas and Lat. fumus (fumes, smoke)
Lith. antras and Skt. antaras (second, the other)
Lith. vilkas and Skt. vṛkas (wolf)
Lith. ratas and Lat. rota (wheel) and Skt. rathas (carriage).
Lith. senis and Lat. senex (an old man) and Skt. sanas (old).
Lith. vyras and Lat. vir (a man) and Skt. vīras (man).
Lith. angis and Lat. anguis (a snake in Latin, a species of snakes in Lithuanian)
Lith. linas and Lat. linum (flax, compare with English 'linen')
Lith. ariu and Lat. aro (I plow)
Lith. jungiu and Lat. iungo, and Skt. yuñje (mid.), (I join)
Lith. gentys and Lat. gentes and Skt. jántis (tribes)
Lith. mėnesis and Lat. mensis and Skt masas (month)
Lith. dantis and Lat. dentes and Skt dantas (teeth)
Lith. naktis and Lat. noctes and Skt. naktis (night)
Lith. ugnis and Lat. ignis and Skt. agnis (fire)
Lith. sėdime and Lat. sedemus and Skt. sīdamas’’ (we sit)
This even extends to grammar, where for example Latin noun declensions ending in -um often correspond to Lithuanian -ų, with the Latin and Lithuanian fourth declensions being particularly close. Many of the words from this list share similarities with other Indo-European languages, including English and Russian. The contribution of Lithuanian was influential in the reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European language.
Lexical and grammatical similarities between Baltic and Slavic languages suggest an affinity between these two language groups. On the other hand, there exist a number of Baltic (particularly Lithuanian) words without counterparts in Slavic languages, but which are similar to words in Sanskrit or Latin. The history of the relationship between Baltic and Slavic languages, and our understanding of the affinity between the two groups, remain in dispute (see: Balto-Slavic languages).
Loanwords
In a 1934 book entitled Die Germanismen des Litauischen. Teil I: Die deutschen Lehnwörter im Litauischen, K. Alminauskis found 2,770 loanwords, of which about 130 were of uncertain origin. The majority of the loanwords were found to have been derived from the Polish, Belarusian, and German languages, with some evidence that these languages all acquired the words from contacts and trade with Prussia during the era of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania.[26] Loanwords comprised about 20% of the vocabulary used in the first book printed in the Lithuanian language in 1547, Martynas Mažvydas's  Catechism.[27] But as a result of language preservation and purging policies, Slavic loanwords currently constitute only 1.5% of the Standard Lithuanian lexicon, while German loanwords constitute only 0.5% of it.[28] The majority of loanwords in the 20th century arrived from the Russian language.[29]
Towards the end of the 20th century, a number of words and expressions related to new technologies and telecommunications were borrowed from English language. The Lithuanian government has an established language policy which encourages the development of equivalent vocabulary to replace loanwords.[30] However, despite the government's best efforts to avoid the use of loanwords in the Lithuanian language, many English words have become accepted and are now included in Lithuanian language dictionaries.[31][32]  In particular, words having to do with new technologies have permeated the Lithuanian vernacular, including such words as:
Monitorius (vaizduoklis) (computer monitor)
Faksas (fax)
Kompiuteris (computer)
Failas (byla, rinkmena) (electronic file)
Other common foreign words have also been adopted by the Lithuanian language. Some of these include:
Taksi (taxi)
Pica (pizza)
Alkoholis (alcohol)
Bankas (bank)
Pasas (passport, pass)
These words have been modified to suit the grammatical and phonetic requirements of the Lithuanian language, but their foreign roots are obvious.
Old Lithuanian
The language of the earliest Lithuanian writings, in the 16th and 17th centuries, is known as Old Lithuanian and differs in some significant respects from the Lithuanian of today.
Besides the specific differences given below, it should be noted that nouns, verbs and adjectives still had separate endings for the dual number.  The dual persists today in some dialects.  Example:

Pronunciation
The vowels written ą, ę, į, ų were still pronounced as long nasal vowels,[33] not as long oral vowels as in today's Lithuanian.
The original Baltic long ā was still retained as such, e.g. bralis "brother" (modern brólis).
Nouns
Compared to the modern language, there were three additional cases, formed under the influence of the Finnic languages.  The original locative case had been replaced by four so-called postpositive cases, the inessive case, illative case, adessive case and allative case, which correspond to the prepositions "in", "into", "at" and "towards", respectively.  They were formed by affixing a postposition to one of the previous cases:
The inessive added -en to the original locative.
The illative added -n(a) to the accusative.
The adessive added -pie to the original locative.
The allative added -pie to the genitive.
The inessive has become the modern locative case, while the other three have disappeared. Note, however, that the illative case is still used occasionally in the colloquial language (mostly in the singular): Lietuvon "to Lithuania", miestan "to the city". This form is relatively productive: for instance, it is not uncommon to hear "skrendame Niujorkan (we are flying to New York)".
The uncontracted dative plural -mus was still common.
Adjectives
Adjectives could belong to all four accent classes in Old Lithuanian (now they can only belong to classes 3 and 4).
Additional remnants of i-stem adjectives still existed, e.g.:
loc. sg. didimè pulkè "in the big crowd" (now didžiame)
loc. sg. gerèsnime  "better" (now geresniamè)
loc. sg. mažiáusime "smallest" (now mažiáusiame)
Additional remnants of u-stem adjectives still existed, e.g. rūgštùs "sour":

No u-stem remnants existed in the dative singular and locative plural.
Definite adjectives, originally involving a pronoun suffixed to an adjective, had not merged into a single word in Old Lithuanian.  Examples:
pa-jo-prasto "ordinary" (now pàprastojo)
nu-jie-vargę "tired" (now nuvar̃gusieji)
Verbs
The Proto-Indo-European class of athematic verbs still existed in Old Lithuanian:

The optative mood (i.e. the third-person imperative) still had its own endings, -ai for third-conjugation verbs and -ie for other verbs, instead of using regular third-person present endings.
Syntax
Word order was freer in Old Lithuanian.  For example, a noun in the genitive case could either precede or follow the noun it modifies.
See also
Lithuanian dictionaries
Martynas Mažvydas
Samogitian dialect
Lithuanian literature

Sources

Leonardas Dambriūnas, Antanas Klimas, William R. Schmalstieg,  Beginner's Lithuanian, Hippocrene Books, 1999, ISBN0-7818-0678-X. Older editions (copyright 1966) called "Introduction to modern Lithuanian".
Remys, Edmund, Review of Modern Lithuanian Grammar, Lithuanian Research and Studies Center, Chicago, 2nd revised edition, 2003.
Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work= (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)
Zigmas Zinkevičius, "Lietuvių kalbos istorija" ("History of Lithuanian Language") Vol.1, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1984, ISBN5-420-00102-0.
Remys, Edmund, General distinguishing features of various Indo-European languages and their relationship to Lithuanian, Indogermanische Forschungen, Berlin, New York, 2007.