I think we're in danger of viewing this from our own modern perspective. We live in a much more mobile society, where someone with intelligence and talent has a much greater opportunity to use these and to rise above disadvantaged beginnings. In earlier times, this was not the case. Many of these 'peasants' (for want of a better word) would have had the intelligence and talent to create. What better than a song or a ballad, which need no resources other than time to think, to express this creativity?

As for being unsophisticated, they may have had little exposure to art music but they were immersed in the musical and textual idioms of their own tradition. Actually, they may have been more aware of art music than we give them credit for - many country musicians' tunebooks contain pieces by classical composers, and they may have had formal musical training in the army or by the church.

It seems to me that it matters little how a song originated. What is significant about a folk song is the way it has then been adapted and changed by successive singers, and often recreated in every performance. That creative process was open to anyone who could sing. Surely that is what we celebrate?