Such are almost all exceptions arising out of the preliminaries of judicial actions,  1<In truth if the proper order of putting forward exceptions is observed, he ought  first to put those forward which lie2 against the jurisdiction of the judge, then  against3 the persons of the parties and other matters which are dilatory, as summonses  and calling to court and the like, then against the editio actionis,4 and then  first, that a thing certain may be brought before the court, [claim the view].> [before]  claiming the view.5 But since it would be onerous to discuss each exception in  its proper place and by itself, it will be easier and more useful, as is evident, to collect  them all in one bundle, so to speak, and treat them all together in order. Therefore  omitting here the tractate on exceptions, let us treat of claiming the view.
On claiming the view and why the view is to be made.
 [The view is made] that a thing certain be brought before the court, that is, that the  demandant show the tenant the thing certain for which he intends to sue,67[The  view is sometimes made to the party, sometimes to the jurors,8 as in the assises in  a possessory action, sometimes in inquests with respect to things as to which the  parties disagree, as9 a place, or an act, as in trespasses.]10 nor does it matter whether  he makes a view to the adverse party11 of the thing claimed or does what amounts  to it, provided that a thing certain is designated,12 by certain bounds or13 by a  recital of places and names.
Of making the view or what amounts to it: to whom it is made and to whom not.
 Let us first see to whom the view is to be made, to whom denied, and where it does  not lie. It is clear that, having seen where it does not lie and to whom it is denied,  for whom it does lie will be evident. The view is denied the tenant in a plea de proparte  sororum, even though a manor with the appurtenances is named in the writ,  because sister claiming against sister cannot designate or specify which portion  ought to fall to her in purparty; furthermore14 she claims nothing other than the  rightful portion which falls to her from the whole land which the sister-parceners  hold of the common inheritance, of which the father or other common ancestor  died seised as of fee, though it could be objected, so it seems, that others hold part  of the same inheritance, of which he, the tenant, has nothing in demesne or in  service.15