Too bad this forum doesn't allow editions. I check Rosenbaum's book and I have to do a huge correction. Michael Rosenbaum's terminology is as follows:

1.- Ancient martial art: from the primitive man to 1400 BC, the Mycenae culture and specifically designed weaponry..
2.- Classical Martial arts or pre-modern martial arts: from 1400 BC to the turn of nineteenth century, industrialization and modern warfare.
3.- Modern martial arts: from the industrialized age. Firearms changed the way people fight, and changed warfare.

What Higashionna Kanryo did was classical karate. What Miyagi tried to do was to create a modern martial art and preserve the classical aspects of his art. As society goes deeper into the industrial age, martial arts become different than their classical predecessors, so now you have martial arts that come indirectly from Japanese ryuha, some of them very different indeed, and you also have a huge development of sport karate.

Too bad I can not edit my previous post. Anyway, Rosembaum's purpose is different than Swift's. Rosembaum tries to describe the evolution of martial arts in general, not only Japanese, and studies the use of kata in different cultures and time periods.

So both Swift and Rosembaum uses the term "classical" for roughly pre XXth century karate. However, Rosembaum's uses the term "modern" to designate what Swift, according to Victor, calls "traditional", "modern" and "current" era.