"I think that it's grossly arrogant........."
Thanks Shimrod, but speaking for myself, I really have no problem having my contribution described as 'flapping about'. At last it gives the impression of a degree of activity which is more than cen be said of the armchair musings we are being treated to here.
We are still not being offered anything to back up the suggestions of Stan and Ollie, but then again, the horizon, from a sedentary position is extremely limited.
The evidence of the existence of folk song is overwhelming and it is, to me at least, self evident that the songs were the products of many people who composed and re-composed them.
There is also evidence that many of them were never even committed to 'hard copy', but remained only in the mouths of the singers.
David Buchan in his 'The Ballad And The Folk' suggested that the ballads never had fixed texts but were remaid on the spot by the singers, using the plot and established commonplaces.
The Travellers, who were universally non-literate (as well as being a major source of our folk songs), made new songs and carried the old ones in their heads.
Even the attitude of rural communities towards literacy was ambivilent, suggesting that the songs were held and communicated almost exclusively orally.
If you have any evidence of 'master craftsman', I would be glad to get it, but once again, I won't hold my breath
.

Jim Carroll