Does the Ictus have rhytmic value?
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,483
    I've heard some choirs elongate the notes that are marked in some editions
    with an ictus like an epesima or a tenuto I thought this was not kosher, but what says you o wise forum?
  • FKulash
    Posts: 82
    Any ictus or episema is editorial. It's up to the director's discretion whether and how to observe those marks.
    .Many people lengthen the second note of a podatus when it has an ictus, e.g., after the leap of an upward fifth in the first mode antiphon "Ave Maria" (1934 Antiphonale, page 862).
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,187
    Any answer to this question will be too simplistic, unfortunately.

    However the simplest answer to the literal question would be: Yes, if by rhythmic you mean regarding the rhythm, the forward movement of the music, but No, if by rhythmic you mean the length of the note.

    The ictus (= blow or beat) is about rhythmic shape, never tempo or duration. The vertical episrma is used in some notations to indicate the ictus some of the time: but it's used for other purposes too, as mentioned above, and not all the icti are so marked.

    There is no one way, no one God-given way, no kashrut, when it comes to performing chant.
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    The most direct answer to your question is to be found in section IV.6 of the Rules for Interpretation printed in the introduction to the Liber, also section VI, rule 3, paragraph a. In addition to the salicus, other instances of the vertical episema/ictus mark sometimes coincide with neumatic breaks in the manuscripts, which indicate lengthening.
    Any ictus or episema is editorial.
    That's not entirely true. The rhythmic markings of the Solesmes editions are additions to the pure Vatican edition, but as noted above, some instances of the vertical episema coincide with neumatic breaks in the oldest manuscripts. The horizontal episema as a rule corresponds to relatively long notes in the tenth-century manuscripts, including neumatic elements such as the clivis and virga actually marked with an episema in the St. Gall manuscripts. For the Ave Maria, compare http://gregorianik.uni-regensburg.de/an/#id/104.
  • ghmus7
    Posts: 1,483
    But my point is...the ictus as printed in the Solemnes is a modern invention yea? So, adding more time to notes that have the ictus is not something indicated by any old notation?
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • madorganist
    Posts: 906
    There are many instances where the ictus mark does coincide with a neumatic break, which is a retroactive indication of lengthening. But there are many other instances where it is not in any way derived from the manuscripts. It is necessary to study duplex or triplex editions to determine which is which. If you are following the Solesmes method, the marked note of the salicus "should be emphasized and lengthened." Continuing to quote from the Liber:
    If in an ascending group the vertical episema is placed over one of the notes it indicates a rather important ictus which should be brought out in the rendering. In the case of a group giving an interval of a fifth, the upper note whenever marked with the vertical episema should be notably lengthened.
Add a Comment