[nonrandomstring]

> what was the real story?

Some of the grittier truth may be about political expediency of taming "knights". Monty Python caricatures aside, until (and beyond) the Templars, many were marauding bands of privateers looting their way around Europe. Sending them off to do God's work while letting them play at "banking" the spoils was probably a neat solution to not having a standing army, but still keeping a cadre of loyal battle-hardened dudes on a string.

When their use expired, as maturing nation states found them less convenient, King Philip IV ordered them rounded up (apocryphally on Friday 13th) in a betrayal I think George Lucas adapted as the fate of The "Jedi".

[tgv]

The Templars were not set up to send off bandits and do God's work. They started as protection for pilgrimage, set up an system to move funds from Europe into the Holy Land to support their work (which included hiring quite a few mercenaries), which turned into banking, and were half-coerced into some of the Crusades (notably not the first), because they were indeed the experienced, hardened and loyal soldiers that were needed. But they did not "bank" the spoils, and regular Crusaders weren't roaming thieves either.

[nonrandomstring]

> regular Crusaders weren't roaming thieves either

Absolutely not. From what I've read they were extraordinarily disciplined. My point was that "knights" more generally until then, are mischaracterised as "good and noble" but were really freelancers [1]. The Templars obtained a better defined security role.

[1] just occurred to me there may be some etymology there.

EDIT: Aha! https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/freelance-orig...

[bazoom42]

> regular Crusaders weren't roaming thieves either

They certainly plundered and murdered. But I guess it could be questioned if they “roamed”?

[tgv]

By profession. The parent comment implied that the Templars and/or Crusaders were bandits sent off to do God's work. That was not the case.

[hef19898]

Fun fact, everytime to see a stone sculpture of a knight on a tomb with his feet crossed, it means he was involved in pillaging and whatnot in the holly lands. So yes, they deffinietly were pillaging thieves. Just look up hoe the Doge of Venice got them to divert to nowaday Istanbul and pillaged it to repay their debt to Venice.

[atchoo]

Nah, that's a popular myth. I too was told it as a child but I understand the real reason is much more mundane... it's easier to sculpt. Creating realistic looking legs out straight requires under-cutting and they still look kinda "off" so crossing the legs was a bit of hack to improve realism without delicate work.

http://the-history-girls.blogspot.com/2016/02/cross-your-leg...

[tgv]

Yes, they did. But their banking operations did not consist of pillage.

> Just look up hoe the Doge of Venice got them to divert to nowaday Istanbul

You're not talking about the Templars, are you?

[hef19898]

No, not the knight templars. Rather crusaders in general, excluding the children's crusade of course.

The templars were incredibly well organized.