> The introduction chronicled the evolution of swordsmanship and martial arts in general from pragmatic battlefield necessities to sports, historical curiositie

> The introduction chronicled the evolution of swordsmanship and martial arts in general from pragmatic battlefield necessities to sports, historical curiosities, and hobbies. Eh? Martial arts has always been a mix of utility and cultural artifact. Greco-Roman wrestling flourished in a/alongside of military utility. Greeks and Romans had swords, shields, spears, bows and arrows. Boxing also traces its history all the way back to the Greeks. Japanese, Korean, and Chinese arts developed in a society with, also, swords, shields, spears, bows and arrows. Notably these cultures often included weapons training ("kobudo" in Japanese) in their curriculum but that did not phase out the empty-handed aspect of the art. Catch wrestling developed among sailors who would not be strangers to guns and rifles. BJJ developed, well, today. There has always been a component of sportsmanship and self-improvement in martial arts. Carmack misreads this introduction, methinks.