Due to its enormous importance, Grotius’s contract doctrine has been extensively investigated by legal historians. This paper seeks to enhance scholarly understanding of this topic by looking at commentaries on De jure belli ac pacis written by German theologians and jurists in the second half of the seventeenth century. The paper focuses on comments concerning promises: the criteria for promises that are binding under natural law; the foundations of the obligation to keep promises; error and duress; and immoral promises. Grotius’s contract doctrine rested on a mélange of sources, both theological and juridical, which were not always consistent. Commentators sought to harmonise them by looking at them from different perspectives: some comments were mainly based on interpretations of ius commune texts, whereas others reflected a moral theological approach. The results drew distinctions (directly or indirectly) between law and moral theology that contributed to the fragmentation of Grotius’s synthesis.

由于格罗蒂乌斯的契约论的重要性，法律史学家对其进行了广泛的研究。本文旨在通过研究十七世纪下半叶德国神学家和法学家对《法律实践》的评论，来增强对这一主题的学术理解。本文着重于关于承诺的评论：根据自然法有约束力的承诺标准；履行承诺义务的基础；错误和胁迫；和不道德的承诺。格罗蒂乌斯的契约学说建立在各种神学和法学渊源上，它们并不总是一致的。评论员试图通过从不同角度审视他们来协调他们：一些评论主要基于对ius公社的解释文本，而其他则反映了道德神学方法。结果在法律和道德神学之间（直接或间接）产生了区分，这导致了格罗蒂乌斯的综合破碎化。