1297年，法兰西国王路易九世（1214-1270）被罗马教皇卜尼法斯八世（Boniface VIII）册封为圣徒，成为13世纪唯一被封圣的国王，史称圣路易。作为卡佩王朝的著名国王，他努力推行司法与行政改革，为法兰西民族国家的初步成长做出了重大贡献；作为虔诚的天主教徒，他生前苦行斋戒、好善乐施，曾发动过两次十字军东征并最终死于突尼斯城下。政治上不乏建树，信仰上被奉为基督徒的典范，圣路易被13世纪西方天主教世界视为最闪耀的圣徒国王。

在同时代人笔下，圣路易生前就因其出色的统治能力和发动的两次十字军东征闻名于世，死后不久便成为“民意”认可的圣徒。不过，在13世纪后期的天主教世界里，只有经过罗马教皇册封才是真正的圣徒。1272年，罗马教皇格里高利十世（Grégoire X，1271-1276）给法国多明我会修士博利厄的若弗鲁瓦写信，要求若弗鲁瓦收集有关圣路易神圣性的证据，从而揭开了圣路易“封圣”的序幕。然而，不久后格里高利十世离开人世。此后的25年里，教皇人选更迭频繁，前后共产生了9位教皇。由于“封圣”程序十分繁琐，每一位新教皇几乎都要对“封圣”材料重新进行调查和审批，这导致许多教皇无法在其任期内完成整个“封圣”过程。此外，法王腓力四世登基后与罗马教皇的关系十分紧张。这些因素都使圣路易的“封圣”进程变得十分缓慢。直至1297年，罗马教皇卜尼法斯八世才颁布“封圣”诏书，正式册封路易九世为圣徒。

在漫长的“封圣”过程中，法国高级教士多次向罗马教廷请愿，要求教廷为圣路易“封圣”。法王腓力三世（Philippe III，1270-1285）和腓力四世（Philippe IV，1285-1314）也多番催促罗马教皇加快“封圣”进程。显然，圣路易的“封圣”是法兰西王国内部和罗马教廷共同努力的结果。也正是在这一过程中，同时代人开始著书记忆圣路易，并建构圣路易形象。圣路易生平及其“封圣”过程的见证者——多明我会修士若弗鲁瓦和夏特勒的纪尧姆以及平信徒让·儒安维尔都撰写了圣路易传。本笃会修士南吉的纪尧姆和方济各会修士圣帕丢斯的纪尧姆虽与圣路易素未谋面，但也依据“封圣”期间留下的档案和“封圣”文件撰写了圣徒传。由此，这五本传记和罗马教廷“封圣”文书成为我们了解同时代人刻画圣路易形象的重要史料。从这些材料的叙述框架和内容来看，他们从不同角度塑造了身为国王和圣徒的圣路易，为世人提供了一个丰满的圣路易形象——虔诚、谦卑和正义。不过，从对圣路易的虔诚、谦卑和正义的理解及其呈现的方式来看，他们所刻画的圣路易形象又各有侧重、互有差异。

首先，从圣路易的虔诚形象来看，他们都强调，圣路易是通过先天继承和后天接受教育这两种途径获得虔诚这一美德的，认为两次十字军东征是圣路易信仰虔诚的重要体现，甚至把死亡视为圣路易升天的标志。不过，从具体的呈现方式来看，罗马教廷几乎从不考虑圣路易的国王身份，只想把圣路易塑造成一心只求为上帝献祭而没有王国与军队统帅观念的虔诚圣徒。若弗鲁瓦、夏特勒的纪尧姆和南吉的纪尧姆则认为，圣路易的虔诚应当包括其执政能力。因此他们在呈现十字军东征中和病危的圣路易形象时，都不同程度地凸显了圣路易的国王尊严。儒安维尔虽然没有明确地把国王的统治能力视为虔诚的内涵，但在建构圣路易虔诚形象时总是能兼顾到圣路易的国王身份，尤其把十字军东征中的圣路易塑造成信仰坚定的英勇统帅，把圣路易的死亡视作最虔诚的国王之死。

其次，他们主要通过圣路易在日常生活中的自律和关爱穷苦人的怜悯之心来呈现其谦卑形象。罗马教廷、若弗鲁瓦和夏特勒的纪尧姆把圣路易塑造成穿苦行者的衣服、吃简单餐食的“托钵国王”以及照顾穷苦人的“父亲”，但有时也指出这些行为与其国王身份不符。儒安维尔则从骑士视角强调圣路易在饮食上的自律，并把他塑造成不喜奢华但穿着“得体”的国王。为了彰显圣路易的谦卑，若弗鲁瓦强调圣路易在信仰事业的经济投入上十分慷慨，但却厌恶国王仪礼所需的排场。然而，儒安维尔认为圣路易是懂得运筹帷幄，并融入到世俗政治生活中的明智君主。此外，同时代人从慎言慎行来凸显圣路易在上帝面前的谦卑姿态，而若弗鲁瓦和儒安维尔还强调圣路易通过颁布法令来清除亵渎上帝的言行和陋习。

最后，他们都认为信仰虔诚、主持公正与维护和平是圣路易正义形象的重要表现。教廷把圣路易比喻为精神层面的“正义恺撒”。若弗鲁瓦和夏特勒的纪尧姆因圣路易在十字军东征中的表现将之视为“义人”；儒安维尔则从世俗的政治和经济利益出发，把发动十字军东征视为圣路易不顾王国与生命的错误之举。教廷和若弗鲁瓦从基督教精神体系出发，把圣路易比喻为基督教世界的和平之王。然而，儒安维尔却认为圣路易所扮演的和平之王和国际“调停员”的角色在一定程度有损王国的利益，并从治理国家的才能这一视角来刻画圣路易的正义形象。

上述内容表明，尽管圣路易的同时代人主要从虔诚、谦卑和正义三个方面去刻画圣路易的形象，但是他们刻画的圣路易形象各有不同。特别是圣路易的“圣徒”形象与“国王”形象之间存在着或隐或现的某种张力，反映了这些作者对圣徒与国王的不同认识。这些认识与13世纪法国的历史进程息息相关。

           In 1297, Pope Boniface VIII canonized King Louis IX of France (1214-1270) as a confessor of the church, which made Louis IX the only saint king in the thirteenth century, known as Saint Louis. As the famous king of the Capetian Dynasty, St. Louis made a very positive contribution to the initial growth of the French nation-state by carrying out judicial and administrative reforms. As a devout Catholic, he worked as hard as he could on the holy sacrifice of his physical penance, his habit to fast during special days and his works of compassion and dispensing of alms to the poor. Besides, he launched two crusades and eventually died at Tunis. Making great political achievements and being worshiped as a faithful model for Christians, St. Louis was hailed as the saint king shining uniquely among the princes and rulers of thirteenth century in the Western Catholic world.

For St. Louis’ contemporaries, he was famous for his excellent dominance and his two crusades during his life. And after his death he soon became a ‘public opinion’ saint. However, in late thirteenth century, only saints who were ordained by the Holy See owned the legitimacy as saint in the Catholic world. In 1272, Pope Grégoire X wrote to Geoffroy de Beaulieu, a French Dominican friar, and asked him to collect the evidence of the sanctity of St. Louis. This was in fact the first step toward a formal canonization proceeding. However, Pope Grégoire X died soon after. In the following twenty-five years, the successions of the Pope happened frequently, and nine Popes acceded the papacy successively within this period. Due to the sophisticated canonization process, the new Pope had to re-investigate and approve almost all of the canonization materials, which prevented many Popes from completing the entire process while in office. In addition, after the accession of Philip IV of France to the throne, relations between the Pope and the French king were tense. These factors caused the canonization process of St. Louis become very slow. It was not until 1297 that Pope Boniface VIII last issued St. Louis’ formal canonization bull.

During the long process of canonization, senior French clerics petitioned the Holy See several times to canonize St. Louis. French kings Philippe III (1270-1285) and Philippe IV (1285-1314) repeatedly sent delegations to Rome to urge Popes to speed up the canonization process. Thus, the canonization of St. Louis was the result of a joint effort within France and the Holy See. It was also during this process that contemporaries began to remember St. Louis and making him as a saint. Those who have written Vita of Saint Louis were the witnesses to his life and to the process of canonization, the Dominican friars, Geoffroy de Beaulieu, Guillaume de Chartres and the layman named Jean de Joinville. A Benedictine, Guillaume de Nangis, and a Franciscan, Guillaume de Saint-Pathus, wrote their Vita based on the documents and texts left over from the canonization period respectively, although they had not met with St. Louis. These five biographies and the canonization-related texts of the Holy See consequently become important historical sources for modern understanding of the portrayal of Saint Louis by his contemporaries. They shaped St. Louis as king and saint depending on different narrative frameworks and different perspectives, thus represented a rich image of St. Louis - the pious, humble, and righteous saint king. However, these images of St. Louis that they portrayed have their own emphasis and differences, because they understood and presented St. Louis’ piety, humility and justice in different ways.

Firstly, in terms of St. Louis’ image of piety, contemporaries emphasized that St. Louis acquired the virtue of piety through innate inheritance and strengthened it from educations. They regarded his two crusades as an important expression to seek the lord with all his heart, and even regarded death as a sign of St. Louis’ ascension to heaven. But not all contemporaries presented these themes in the same way. The Holy See seemed to portray him as a devout saint who was ‘sacrifice of the lord’ and almost ignored his throne or identity of military command. Geoffroy, Guillaume of Chartres and Guillaume de Nangis saw St. Louis’ piety not only by his faith but also through his political capacity, therefore, when they narrated the behaviors of St. Louis during two crusades and before his death, they highlighted the dignity of St. Louis as a king to varying degrees. Although Joinville did not consider St. Louis’ political capacity as one important element of his piety, but he always accounted St. Louis’ kingship when constructing his image of piety, such as making St. Louis a heroic commander during crusades and the most devout king before his death.

Secondly, in contemporaries’ texts, the humble image of St. Louis was often made through his self-discipline in daily life and compassion for the poor. The Holy See, Geoffroy and Guillaume de Chartres regarded Saint Louis as an ‘mendicant king’ who dressed and ate like a mendicant, and tried his best to care the poor just like the ‘father’ of the poor. Even so, contemporaries noted that these acts sometimes were incompatible with his status as king. Besides, Joinville narrated St. Louis’ humility through his self-discipline in daily life both eating and drinking behaviors from a chivalrous point of view, and portrayed him as a king who did not like extravagance but dressed decently. Furthermore, to represent St. Louis’ humility, Geoffroy stressed that St. Louis was generous in works related to the Christian faith, but abhorred the pomp required for a royal rite. However, Joinville regarded Saint-Louis as a wise king who was good at strategic planning and was integrated into sophisticated political life. In addition, contemporaries highlighted St. Louis’ humble gesture before God in terms of prudence of word and deed, for example, Geoffroy and Joinville stressed that St. Louis published edict against swearers and blasphemies.

    Last but not least, contemporaries have recognized the piety of faith, his attempt to display justice to his subjects, to preserve his kingdom in peace and to keep and maintain peace among nearby and neighbors, as important expressions of St. Louis’ image of justice. For Holy See, St. Louis might deservedly be likened to a ‘righteous Caesar’ on a spiritual level. Geoffroy and Guillaume de Chartres regarded St. Louis as a ‘righteous man’ mainly through his behaviors during two crusades. However, Joinville saw his launch of the second crusade as a mistake from a secular view of political and economic interests, because it not only took St. Louis’ life but also was harmful to the safety of kingdom. The Holy See and Geoffroy likened St. Louis to the king of peace in Christendom from the perspective of Christian spiritual system. However, Joinville argued that St. Louis’ role as King of Peace and international mediator was to some extent detrimental to the Kingdom’s interests and portrayed a righteous image in terms of his ability to govern.

The above suggests that although contemporaries regarded piety, humility and justice as the most important virtues of St. Louis’ images, but the images of St. Louis portrayed by them have their own emphasis and are different from one another. In particular, there is a tension, implicit or explicit, between the image of the ‘saint’ and the image of the ‘king’ in St. Louis, which reflects the different perceptions of the saints by these authors. These perceptions are closely related to the historical process of France in the thirteenth century.