Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

Dating and identification of the first English edition remains problematic. We assume that the first impression was released in May 1834, whereas the presented copy comes from the second impression, which differs in the details of the cover only. It is particularly the presence of the Polonaise Op. 3, published in April 1836, among Chopin's pieces mentioned on the cover that proves that the presented copy could not have appeared prior to that date. For a more detailed discussion on those issues – see the characterization of EE1 in the 1st mov. of the Concerto.

In EE1, the text of FE was reproduced with numerous corrections and additions. The revision was thorough – a significant number of patent mistakes and inaccuracies was corrected, e.g.:

• erroneous bass notes in bars 1 and 5,
• an overlooked octave sign in bar 54
• erroneous f¹ to g¹ in bar 97,
• missing staccato dots in bar 101,
• overlooked accidentals in bar 181, 221, 239, 262, 263, 266-267, 358-360, 361-371, 390-391, 481, 486,
• erroneous grace notes in bar 203,
• rhythmic errors in bar 231, 469,
• erroneous g³ to g³ in bar 482.

Less obvious changes may also be considered to be accurate or at least justified, e.g.:

• ties to g² were added in bars 113-114 and to the e²-e³ octave in bars 384-385,
• a mark was added in bar 147, 198, 272, 365, 442,
• a number of cautionary accidentals was added, e.g. naturals in bar 158, 232, 237-239, 495,  in bar 214,
• slurs were added in bars 161-162, 171-175, 192,
• L.H. and R.H. slurs were unified in bar 182, 204, 434,
• the rhythmic error in bar 196 was corrected,
• a³ was changed to b³ in bar 225 and 230,
• a wedge was added in bar 230, 241, 320, staccato dots in bars 404-405, 420,
• staccato dot was changed to a wedge in bar 244,
• slurs and a wedge in the L.H. were added in bars 256-257,
• the abbreviated notation of the octaves in the L.H. was written out in bars 297 and 299,
• b² in bar 320 was prolonged to a crotchet,
• d³ was changed to e³ in bar 450.

However, nothing indicates that Chopin could have participated in the creation of EE – all changes and additions with respect to FE may be explained by a thorough revision, particularly since the reviser was Fontana, who was friends with Chopin and who knew his output.

A few arbitrary changes that do not fit into the two categories discussed above were also introduced, e.g.:

• the beginning of the slur in bar 65 was moved,
• a slur in the L.H. was added in bar 121, in the R.H. in bars 379-380,
• in bars 128-142, the long accents were reproduced as short,
• e was added on the 3rd quaver in bar 280,
• rests in the top voice in bars 321-322 and 325-326 were added,
• the  before a³ in bar 322 was moved to the right place and an analogous mark was added in bar 326,
• d¹ in bar 333 and 335 was prolonged to a crotchet,
• the ambiguous slur of FE was replaced with two slurs in bars 393-394; those slurs were arbitrarily added in bars 397-398.

Some of the mistakes went unnoticed, e.g. the missing naturals in bar 179, 186, 187, 265, 267 and 358.

EE1 also committed new mistakes, e.g. e instead of c at the end of bar 367, f² instead of e² in bar 490. The cautionary  before f¹ in bar 333 was overlooked. In the slur added in the L.H. in bars 120-121 the fragment in bar 120 was overlooked.

As far as Fontana's fingering is concerned, most probably it was not consulted with Chopin, although it is highly compliant with the Chopinesque entries in the pupil's copies. However, it cannot be excluded that Fontana, staying in touch with Chopin during the creation of the Concerto, got to partially know the composer's fingering. On the other hand, it seems to be impossible that he could have memorised detailed indications in this respect concerning the entire Concerto, hence the issue of authenticity of particular proposals of Fontana are to be approached with great caution. Wherever FE gives Chopinesque fingering, Fontana generally did not change it but only completed it.

Nevertheless, there are a few exceptions, e.g. in ?????.