[2] It is considered to mainly represent the Byzantine text-type (see Textual character below),[5] but it has numerous peculiar readings.

[9]: 59 [3] It includes rough and smooth breathing marks (utilised to designate vowel emphasis), with accents (used to indicate voiced pitch changes) likely from the original scribe, but these are often omitted or incorrectly placed.

[9]: 56 The nomina sacra (special names/words considered sacred in Christianity, abbreviated usually with the first and last letter, and notified with an overline) are employed throughout.

The last letter is dependent upon case; the nominative case abbreviations are as follows: ΑΝΟΣ / ανθρωπος (man), ΔΑΔ / δαυιδ (David), ΘΣ / θεος (God), ΙΣ / Ιησους (Jesus), ΙΛΗΜ / ιερουσαλημ (Jerusalem), ΙΗΛ / ισραηλ (Israel), ΚΣ / κυριος (Lord), ΜΗΡ / μητηρ (mother), ΟΥΝΟΣ / ουρανος (heaven), ΟΥΝΙΟΣ / ουρανιος (heavenly), ΠΗΡ / πατηρ (father), ΠΝΑ / πνευμα (spirit), ΠΝΙΚΟΣ / πνευματικος (spiritual), ΣΡΙΑ / σωτηρια (salvation), ΥΣ / υιος (son), ΧΣ / χριστος (Christ/Messiah).

According to this colophon the manuscript was written by a scribe named Basil, and it was bound by one Theodoulos, who commended themselves to the Virgin and St.

[15] Textual critic Silva Lake considered the text of the codex as a somewhat diluted form of family Π, with a large number of peculiar readings, most of which are either misspellings or careless and ignorant mistakes.

[11]: 37  The readings it does not share with other Family Π representatives are supported outside the family, and they seem to be connected with the late Alexandrian group (C, L, M, N, Δ), but the number of Alexandrian readings is not high, and Silva Lake considered them as a result of accident as opposed to influence from a different text-type.

[6] Biblical scholar Johann M. A. Scholz valued it very highly, and he collated its text and noted its textual variants in 1820,[9]: 53–90  but with so little care and numerous errors that his list is now ignored.

[3] Its textual variants are cited in Tischendorf's Editio Octava Critica maior (a critical edition of the Greek New Testament).

[3]: 153, Plate VII Historian Henri Omont and New Testament scholar William Hatch published some fragments of the codex in separate facsimile samples in 1892 and 1896 respectively.

[6] Kenyon stated the manuscript must be not earlier than the 11th century, due to the formal liturgical hand and on palaeographic grounds.

[11]: 11 Lake proclaimed it is difficult to prove it was written earlier than the year 1000, and it is perhaps as late as the middle of the eleventh century.

[11]: 10  This assessment was based rather on the textual dependency from other manuscript members of family Π, than on palaeographical grounds.

According to Lake, Minuscule 1219 represents a text of family Π in its earlier stage as opposed to Codex Cyprius.

[11]: 36 Hatch argued the letters Β, Δ, Κ, Λ, Μ, Ξ, Π, Υ, Φ, Χ, Ψ, and Ω have forms which are characteristic of the late 10th or the early 11th century CE.