Page: 
Source: 
p. 4, b. 51-62
p. 1, b. 1-24
p. 2, b. 25-39
p. 3, b. 40-50
p. 4, b. 51-62
p. 5, b. 63-77
p. 6, b. 78-91
p. 7, b. 92-103
p. 8, b. 104-113
p. 9, b. 114-126
Main text
Main text
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - First French edition
FEFo - Forest copy
FEH - Hartmann copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE1
GE2a - Altered impression of GE2
GE3 - Second German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FED - First French edition
FEFo - Forest copy
FEH - Hartmann copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE1
GE2a - Altered impression of GE2
GE3 - Second German edition
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Corrected impression of EE1
EE3 - Revised impression of EE2
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF Main text


  b. 59

No extra notes in FE (→GE,EE)

3 notes in FED

4 notes in FEH, possible interpretation

Interpretation of the draft notation in FED is hypothetical to a significant extent – it is only 3 note heads that are written on the ledger lines, without stems or beams. Therefore, it is unknown in which rhythm they should be performed; their pitch is also unclear, since only the middle one is a distinctly written cnote. We present the most likely interpretation, based on the following premises:

  • the draft nature of the entry suggests an obvious, easy-to-remember figure, e.g. repeated notes;
  • if the person entering these notes wanted them to be performed still before the end of the passage in the L.H., he or she could have easily written them in the corresponding place (earlier). In turn, it was difficult to fit them still before c3 on the 5th beat of the bar, but already after the minim in the L.H. It supports the placement suggested by us;
  • a variant implementing most likely a similar idea, written with quavers, is to be found in FEH.

According to us, such a placement of repeated c3 notes – directly before the triplet that ends the bar – is not excluded also by the notation of FEH, which we suggest as an alternative interpretation of that source. Naturally, none of the variants described in this note can be linked with the literal reading of the entry in FEH which occurs in the 1st half of the bar. 

Compare the passage in the sources»

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies, Annotations in FED, Authentic post-publication changes and variants, Annotations in FEH

notation: Pitch

Missing markers on sources: FE1, FES, FED, FEJ, FEH, GE1, GE2, GE3, EE3, EE1, EE2, FEFo, GE2a