Hand-written sources: autographs and copies.

Printed sources: first editions and later editions.

Mixed-type sources: printed with hand-written notes.

AUTOGRAPHS

Autographs of Chopin’s works may be divided into five groups. Below we give a brief description of each group from the point of view of its significance for establishing the final version of the musical text:

1. sketches — do not directly serve as base texts, but may indirectly influence the final version of the work;

2. fair copies in their non-final version, or first redactions — similar to sketches as far as their value for establishing the final text is concerned;

3. fair copies meant for print – usually serving as primary sources, either on their own or together with later editions corrected by Chopin himself;

4. fragments or whole works written by Chopin on various occasions, usually into the albums of his friends and acquaintances;

5. twelve incipits of the compositions written in Chopin’s own hand into the list of works in the collection of first editions belonging to Jane W. Stirling — of only auxiliary significance for the final text.

It should be stressed that the above division, as usual in similar cases, should not be treated as strict; the boundaries between the groups, particularly between the first three categories, may sometimes be fuzzy.

The sources that are most valuable for a given edition, i.e. autographs – fair copies, are rarely written by Chopin in a calligraphic manner. They usually have deletions, corrections and additions written on the neighbouring free staves. A typical feature of Chopin’s autographs is the treatment of repeated fragments –they are marked by digits or letters written into empty bars, and it is with the same digits or letters that Chopin marks relevant bars upon their first appearance in the text.

Just like other composers, Chopin sometimes made errors in his own manuscripts. His most frequent mistakes are omitted accidentals, yet sometimes we may come across incorrect rhythmic values (too many or too few values per bar), and sometimes even errors in pitch (a ‘lapsus calami’ typical for composers).

COPIES

Over a long period of time, Chopin used as base texts not only his autographs but also copies he commissioned to be made by others.

1. Julian Fontana (1810-1869), Chopin’s schoolmate and friend, pianist and composer, was a copyist of most works written by Chopin between 1836 and 1841, or at least the following: Études Op. 25 no. 4, 5, 6, 12, twenty-four Preludes Op. 28, four Mazurkas Op. 30, Scherzo in B minor Op. 31, four Mazurkas Op. 33, two Polonaises Op. 40, Tarantelle Op. 43 (probably two more copies of that piece existed as well), Polonaise Op. 44 (copy is not extant), Allegro de concert Op. 46, Ballade in A major Op. 47 (copy not extant), two Nocturnes Op. 48 and Fantasy in F minor Op. 49 (copy not extant). All those copies were made to serve as base texts for printing first editions. Opuses 25, 30, 31, 40, 46 and 48 have Chopin’s corrections in the musical text.

2. The second most prolific copyist – judging by the number of works copied by him as base texts – was Chopin’s ‘favourite pupil’ Adolf Gutmann (1819-1882), who copied at least the following extant Chopin’s works: Études Op. 25 no. 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 11, Sonata in B minor Op. 35, Ballade in F major Op. 38 and Scherzo in C minor Op. 39. All those copies served as base texts for first editions and all contain Chopin’s hand-written corrections.

3. An unknown copyist of two Nocturnes Op. 37 and four Mazurkas Op.41. Inhis meticulous and clean copies of both opuses, although not free from mechanical errors, we come across corrections made in Chopin’s hand. The copies of both opuses were meant to serve as base texts. Arthur Hedley’s guess that the copyist must have been a professional, derived from the graphic features of his musical handwriting, seems convincing.

4. Acopyist of Berceuse Op. 57, with the composer’s corrections and additions, including the added two initial bars of the composition. That copy also served as the base text for print.

The extant copy of Nocturne in F minor Op. 55 no. 1 made by the same copyist, with Chopin’s hand-written dedication for J. W. Stirling, was not used as a base text for any edition.

5. An unknown copyist of the Mazurka in A minor, in whose copy several small additions appear that might possibly have been made by Chopin.

6. An unknown copyist of two earlier versions of Berceuse Op. 57; those do not have any additions by Chopin, neither were they used as base texts for print.

As already mentioned above, in exceptional cases we also give the source status to copies made from copies, not from autographs. One such example may be a copy of Ballade in A major Op. 47 made by Saint-Saëns from an earlier copy (most probablyFontana’s), which in turn was made from the autograph. Saint-Saëns’s copy allows us to reconstruct that earlier copy in detail, which is of fundamental importance for the determination of the ultimate text of that work.

Obviously, the above list of copyists and Chopin’s works copied by them may not be considered complete.