Jim wrote:-
As I said before, once we accept that country people were capable of and inclined towards song making, then surely it is logical to accept that they could and probably did make a great number of them, if not most.

I have been enjoying the more thoughtful approach that Jim Carroll has been bringing to his recent posts but though they require a more considered response, there are still some things that I must disagree with in what he writes.
I'm afraid that my copy of Roud is currently on loan to a friend so I cannot quote pages here as Pseu has been doing so effectively but I remember clearly that somewhere near the beginning of the book, he writes that his arguments in the book will be based on evidence and that if he cannot back up what he says with any evidence then he will not be saying it.
It follows from this that any criticism of Roud should carry the same weight of precision of thinking and writing. To my mind this renders a statement that includes surely it is logical to accept that they could and probably did make a great number of them, if not most. inadmissible because rather than being logical, it actually carries a degree of speculation.
I seem to remember that I made this point several hundred posts ago but it seems to need reiterating here.
I would say that some years ago, I would have found very little to argue with what Jim says above but as a result of reading a number of books in recent times by the likes of Gammon, Roud and Graebe that I try now to bring more rigour to what I write (though I am likely as the next person to lapse into humour when It seems to be needed!)