It is difficult to say what prompted the people working on GE (→EE,IE) to add a 
raising f2 to f
2. Perhaps the missing 
to the bottom note in the next third, which results in e
2 when interpreted literally, confused the engraver or the reviser. The erroneous accidental was removed only by FE, perhaps after comparing it with analogous bar 126, in which f2 is impossible due to f1 in the L.H. sequence of thirds.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Errors in GE, GE revisions, FE revisions, Errors repeated in EE
notation: Pitch