Almost the whole part of RH in this bar is illegible because of charred corners of the manuscript. We can deduce the content of this and previous bars from FC3, EE and GE1. There is no doubt about the pitch of notes as there are no differences in the sources. Only slurs and an irregular pattern of dotting crotchets in the middle voice of the whole part are problematic. In the main text we present a unified version based on b. 153.
A similar situation pertains to bars 63, 92, 196, 242 and repetitions in bars 108, 157.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
notation: Pitch