Op. 22, Polonaise

GE1a bears clear traces of progressive wear and tear of engraving plates in the form of small 'blank spots', occurring in various elements of notation, e.g. noteheads, accidentals, clefs, beams, letters or digits. Here and there one can also observe more serious defects, e.g. in b. 219. The number of such defects must have been significant, since one can notice corrections in a few places, consisting in re-engraving small areas of a page. It seems that they were aimed at 'refreshing' the worn fragments of the plate and sometimes also at amending certain graphically awkward places. However, the engraver's carelessness resulted in the following mistakes:

• in b. 44 the new engraving encompassed the 2nd and 3rd beats on both staves. The unintended effects include a shorter  mark and divided beaming of the L.H. quavers. One can also see a change in the font of the leggiero indication and the use of a slightly different pedal release mark;
• in b. 78 the changes cover the 2nd and 3rd beats on the top stave and resulted in rhythmic errors – the demisemiquaver beams were overlooked in the beaming on the 2nd beat as well as the quaver flag of the e²-e³ octave (the wedge above the octave also disappeared). In addition, the L.H. slurs on the 2nd beat were overlooked, while the accent on the last quaver was printed lower than in GE1;
• in b. 132, in the re-engraved area, comprising the run that ends the trill,  was overlooked;
• in b. 149, there are no demisemiquaver beams in the beaming on the 2nd and 3rd beats of the bar; the accent on the last quaver is also absent;
• in b. 206, due to the re-engraving of the 'overspreading' beaming of the run, the accent on the b² quaver was overlooked. One can also see that the ending of the L.H. slur was moved, and the font of the pedal release mark changed;

Traces of such interventions are also visible on the top stave in the 2nd half of b. 101, where the corrections did not result in any textual changes, and at the end of b. 273, where the retouches are evidenced by, e.g. the change of the shape of the slur, elevated beams of the last two R.H. triplets and poorly copied (overlooked?) ledger line on the bsemiquaver. 

As the music text of GE1a differs from GE1 only in the indicated places, we discuss this edition only there; otherwise we regard it as identical to GE1.