The 
mark is written in A inaccurately – the top arm is clearly shorter than the bottom one. We assume the top one, written first, to be reliable. The starting point of the mark raises other doubts – strictly speaking, it is difficult to reconcile a long accent over c1 with a crescendo beginning from this very note. Consciously or not, that aspect was taken into account by the copyists independently – both in FC and CGS the mark begins from the next quaver. In general, that mark was reproduced strictly in accordance with the Stichvorlage only in EE.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in GE, Inaccuracies in FE, Scope of dynamic hairpins, Inaccuracies in FC, Inaccuracies in A
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins