it is clear that the appurtenances are not connected with the right itself, but with  the church, constructed of wood and stone; not as ingress and egress are appurtenant  to a right of pasturing and the like, or repair to a right of way.1 Nor is the  rule that in the assise of darrein presentment the jurors ought to see the church to  which the presentation is made, an objection, because this has nothing to do with  the right, but [is done] to make clear the church to which he is presented, the thing  constructed of wood and stone; the two are completely different, though in a way  connected. 2<The view was once claimed of the advowson of a church because there  were different churches in the same vill, but it was afterwards revoked by judgment,  so that the writ of view remained, because the church in which the advowson  was claimed could be designated in another way, by what amounted to the same  thing, as the advowson of the church of the blessed Peter. On this there is matter  in [the roll] of Trinity term in the second year after the war in the county of Kent,  [the case] of the abbot of Nutley.>3
If the right of advowson ought to be taken into the lord king's hand.
 Since the right of advowson of a church is incorporeal, if on the tenant's default  the sheriff is ordered to seize it into the hand of the lord king, how may it be seized,  since it is incorporeal, invisible, intangible and cannot be touched, an act which  seems impossible?4 I answer: in truth there can be no right without a body and a  subject in which it inheres. If it is said that it inheres in the estate or tenement in  which the church is situated, it then seems at first sight that the estate ought to be  seized and thus the right of that advowson. But the estate is not seized because the  right of advowson does not inhere in the estate directly, but through a mesne, which  is the church, as constructed of wood and stones, [because], as was said above, it is  the right of advowson of such church, not of such estate.5 Therefore since the right  of advowson inheres in the church, let the sheriff be told to seize the church into the  hand of the lord king by a simple taking, and in consequence he takes that which  inheres in the body, as may be seen of a right of pasturing and the like.
Where the view or the equivalent lies.
 Where does the view lie? I say that it lies generally with respect to all lands  claimed by writ of right patent, or by other writs close in which the matter may be  brought to the duel, especially because of the oath of the champions,