mUltimate Chopin

WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Fontana's revisions

b. 54

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Dotted semiquavers in JC, GEF & PE

Semiquavers and rests in FEF
..

The rests of FEF were inserted only at the stage of printing instead of extending dots, present in all remaining sources. Therefore, it is certainly an arbitrary change introduced by Fontana in the last moment and not entirely coordinated with the slurs he added before.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Fontana's revisions

b. 72-73

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Repeated third in JC & PE

Tied third in EF
..

The ties sustaining the d1-f1 third in EF do not find confirmation neither in the remaining sources nor in analogous bars 76-77, which significantly reduces the probability of their authenticity. The struck third at the beginning of bar 77 is confirmed in PE by the portato articulation marking for this quaver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Fontana's revisions

b. 78-79

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

 without termination in JC

 with termination in EF

 in PE
..

In the main text we consider the wavy lines visible in PE, which indicate filling the entire crotchets with trill. In turn, we do not consider the ending of the trill in bar 78, which in case of EF was probably added by Fontana.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Fontana's revisions

b. 78

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Semiquaver & rest in JC & PE

Dotted semiquaver in EF
..

The rhythm on the 2nd quaver of the bar, compatible in JC and PE, is certainly authentic. In turn, the different version of EF may be a result of Fontana's revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Fontana's revisions

b. 88-97

composition: WN 17, Polonaise in B♭ major

Tie & slur in JC

Slurs in FEF

Slurs in GEF

Suggested supplement to EF ties

Ties in PE, possible interpretation

Slurs in PE, probable interpretation
..

The meaning and number of slurs starting from the d and d1 crotchets on the 2nd beat of bars 88-89 and 96-97 are unclear. The situation in JC and PE, in which those bars are only a repetition of bars 52-53 and 60-61, is discussed in the note concerning those bars. Consistent ties in bars 88 and 96 in EF may be a result of Fontana's interpretation and revision, which is indicated by lack of a similar consistency in bars 89 and 97, including the difference between FEF and GEF in bar 89. However, assuming that the notation of FEF in bars 88-89 and 96 is correct, we propose to add the missing slurs in bar 97.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in Fontana's editions , Fontana's revisions