The authenticity of the version with d
is unquestionable – it was present in [A], which is proved by the compatible versions of GC and FE1. In turn, in the case of the version of FE4 (repeated then in EE2), although it seems to be a correction indicated by Chopin, a misunderstanding at the time of implementing the proofreading cannot be excluded (cf., e.g., a patent mistake in bar 182 of the Scherzo). The discussed change should be perhaps linked to an erroneous (or temporary?) correction in bar 30 – having noticed there an incorrect text with the B1-F-d tenth chord (or willing to return to the B1-F-B chord), Chopin may have ordered the reviser to "change d to B in the ending of the Marche," having in mind the ending before the D major section, of a non-marche character, hence bar 30. The reviser, in turn, implemented the order in the ending of the entire Marche, i.e. in bar 84.
According to us, the stylistic arguments do not give ground to consider one of the versions to be more likely:
-
the chord with d, combining in one sound the B1 and d notes of the bass ostinato constitutes its natural and logic ending. In addition, playing the minor third of the chord prevents domination of the longer sustained final chord by its major equivalent present in overtones;
-
the empty fifths of the chord with B determine the mournful character of the Marche to a significant extent, whereas ending the piece with the same chord it started with combines the whole in a sui generis memento mori.
Taking into account the above and the division of this chord between the hands, probably corrected by Chopin in GC, in the main text we give the version with d in the R.H.
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Authentic corrections of FE
notation: Pitch
Back to note