The d
note, present in FE1, must be erroneous, which is proven by the tie reaching it from the preceding bar, as well as by the fact that it would be a completely unjustified deviation from the structure of analogous motifs. However, the origin of this version is unclear. One could think of a Terzverschreibung error – d instead of B, which should be in this chord as a tied note. According to us, it is confusion of bars that is more likely – the only correctly engraved note was E, while the remaining ones, d-g-b, were taken from the bottom stave in bar 57, confusingly similar with regard to the top notes. This would explain both the wrong pitch and the presence of 4 notes only in this chord. In FE2 (→EE1) this note was corrected to B, yet without adding e, which we consider a simplified or unfinished correction. Moreover, in both versions it is impossible to sustain the e quaver in the next bar, which is confirmed by the lack of a respective tie.
The correct text of EE2 was most probably drawn from GE1.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: EE revisions, Errors in FE, Errors resulting from corrections, Terzverschreibung error, Authentic corrections of FE, FE revisions
notation: Pitch
