You raise an interesting question. True, there are some stresses which seem out of place in the example you have given; but, there are some that are out of place in your own attempt at rectification. Indeed, there seem to be pluses and minuses to each version. In my opinion, and with all due deference to you, the published example that you have provided flows, on the whole, more fluently than yours. This is a matter that usually needs to be addressed by carefully singing the text with primacy given to word and syntactic rhythm. We must, as you wisely point out, be always careful in this music not to be obsessed with metre. Recite the text before singing it, and sing it closely to how you recite it. Such a procedure is often as helpful to metrical music as it is essential to chant.

C wants to fit the rhythmic/metric scheme for the whole piece into the first accent. I feel the first big accent on "lux" with my choir, while pointing out that "nata" needs plenty of text accent. One of the charming parts of this score is that there is a real duple/triple dialogue (e.g., contratenor on the text "quondam contegi" and so on).

This quasi mensural edition (http://www2.cpdl.org/wiki/images/9/94/Tallis_ONata.pdf) is a better score to read from, but I use your "B" above just because it includes the translation. For my singers, that is more important than the rhythmic implications of the meter: after all, I just want them to sing the stresses I give them! :)

We sing the mensural one I linked above with a professional Renaissance group I sing with, and all of us (who are in the group precisely because we love Tudor polyphony) appreciate its less overbearing nature! That said, it's a much different type/quality of singer.

Quite nicely done, CGM.

This year I made a reduced scoring for four voices, which I think mostly succeeds. All the biting cross-relations are intact. At the end, when one of the tenor voices is moved to the alto part, a little power is lost due to the shift in tessitura, and the reconstituted tenor line requires considerable effort. That being said, if you've only got one tenor, this arrangement may suffice.

CGM, that is a wonderful edition. How do you keep singers from going too strongly to "lux", neglecting "nata"? While I like the three grouping after the rests in the phrases, it does (to me) shape the character strongly into a metrical framework. That's one of the things I struggle with in this piece...the dialogue of text and harmonic rhythm.

Let's get the tempo markings straightened out, in accord with what Tallis actually put in his score (and clearly intended, once you understand what is there):

The "C with a dot in the middle" signifies "tempus imperfectum, prolatio maior" – which means what? Well, the C means that the overall rhythmic pattern (albeit perhaps quite slow) is in two semibreves, dotted because the dot in the middle of the C means that the two-beat patterns is to be regarded as subdivided into three minims. The modern way of notating the time signature for Tallis's score (without changing note values) is 6/2. With the note values halved, it would be 6/4. In no way whatsoever should the time signature with note values halved be given as 3/2, which implies "tempus perfectum, prolatio minor" or an overall beat pattern of three beats (minims) with subdivision into two crotchets. With the original note values of Tallis's score, if he wanted to indicate an overall pattern of three semibreves subdivided into two minims, he would have used a "circle" (with no dot in the middle).

David Fraser's 6/2 score (from CPDL) is, in fact, a correct rendering in modern notation, by an acknowledged Byrd-Tallis scholar. Halving note values would render the score in 6/4, and to label such a score as 3/2 misses the overall rhythmic structure of the piece. And to render it as 3/2 (or even 6/4) with a 3 crotchet pickup puts undue stress on "lux" and other similarly positioned syllables. The overarching stress pattern is not on every minim (or every second crotchet, although in isolated individual voices there are some instances of "hemiola" patterns (exercise: find them).

Bumping with Lent 2 coming up!

Another four-voice version I found to throw into the mix (with a singing English translation, to boot) . . . this one also has an extra "crunch" between the soprano and tenor in m. 6. I've never seen this one before....hmm.

http://folio.furman.edu/projects/anthems/pdf/O_Light_from_Light.pdf