What was the templars role in the Crusades? I keep searching

They killed muslims.

File: Ed Bucks.png (323KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

323KB, 640x480px

>>283567
Being bankers and securing trade routes.

So crusaders=templars?

>>283567
Protect pilgrims and their finances between Europe and the holy land. There, /thread

>>283580
>>283624
what about in a battle? Were they in front of the army or they didn't even fight?

Find the holy grail

>>283632
They and the teutonics got BTFO by the Mongols at mohi and legnica.

protip: hospitallers>templebs

>>283632
Heavy Cavalry and Heavy Infantry.

The trick to those martial orders is the same trick we use today, professional armies that train together to create more cohesion and specialize in specific strategies and tactics.

Most armies of that period were levied troops, so you could say the role of Templars were "mercenaries" (using this loosely) who operated as elite heavy infantry or heavy cavalry.

>>283567
You evidently didn't search enough.

Read their manifesto: Règle et statuts de l'ordre du Temple

>>283567
Order of fighter-monks, recognized by the papacy for their bravery and commitment for the cause of Christianity in the Orient.

Made initially mostly out of French noble heads, the newly sanctioned Order gained critical status and power in it's ranks.

The Church gave them land, and the wars fueled them with gold.

They became the first true "banking corporation", lending money in their late stages to kings.

They virtually became an enclave-state, spread out in all Western, Central Europe and Eastern Mediterenean.

The Templars were accused by the Pope for blasphemy, devil-worship and sodomy.

In fact, the French King Philip persuaded the Pope in removing the Templar thread because he was highly in debt to them.

On the other side, the Papacy was afraid of the high power of the Templar Order which could spin out of control. Not only that, but it seems the Templars went down the paths of gnosticism and occult science, basically becoming a huge dogmatic threat to the reign of the Vatican.

Research on your own. There is a lot to uncover, and a lot that is lost to history.

>>283567
>>283730

That being said, the effective role of the Templars in the Crusades is hard to pinpoint.

Initially, their mission was to safeguard christian pilgrims to the Holy Lands across Anatolia. Afterwards, their role was that of Heavy Infantry in the so called Holy wars. Lastly, they we're basically landlords and peace keepers (just like UN "peace"keepers now).

It must be said that they were the high banner of the christian armies; their impact in battle is said to have been immense.

>>283567
The Templar order was mainly made of knight-brothers, sergeants-at-arms and turcopoles. When they had enough money, before campaign, they completed their army with crossbowmen or foot soldiers, paid mercenaries.

Their command structure was based simply on social rank. The nobility, knighted men, were on top, serving as Grandmaster, seneschal, or field marshal.
They also had local commanders, who had to patrol roads, protect churches and guard pilgrims, generally with small bands of knights.

In Europe, they had special establishment destined to recruit and get money, volunteers, weapons and horses that they sent back to Jerusalem.

So, now, militarily. Was distinguished the Templars from any feudal army ?

The most important thing that can be noted is that the Templars did not seek glory. The french knights were well-known for charging and all, but not the Templars. This has a lot to do with the simple life they tried to live (They had no feast, no tourney, no lord or girl to impress).

At the height of its power, the Temple had 400 knights, and a thousand sergeants.
Tactically, the Templars were basically just like the french army. Just like them, they had the infantry attacking first and their knights doing a couched-lance charge. Only the turcopoles, who were mobile, were more "exotic".
They were however far more disciplined and obedient than the european knights.

Though they were great warriors, they never had any real victories. Their whole military history is made of defeats, one after the other, barely saved by the intervention of European kings. In the end, the Templars were out from the Holy Lands.
But the establishment in Europe, those made to give money to the Order, remained... Until 1307, when Philippe IV decided that he could use this gold for better things.

So in the end, the Templars were great soldiers. They were great in combat and useful to defend the Holy Land... But even that wasn't enough against the muslims.

>>283567
Go to youtube and find the Real Crusades History channel. Lot of good stuff there.

They were entrusted with the duty of protecting pilgrims, on the battlefield they are jus heavy cavalry/infantry

>>283567
>>283632
Initially just pilgrim escorts, but when they started to get enough power, they were pretty much just part of the military forces in the area as shock troops. The Templars especially were like tanks. Frequently kicking the shit through numerically superior forces.

>>283730
>On the other side, the Papacy was afraid of the high power of the Templar Order which could spin out of control. Not only that, but it seems the Templars went down the paths of gnosticism and occult science, basically becoming a huge dogmatic threat to the reign of the Vatican.
Not according to Pope Clement at the time. They were innocent, and Phillip la Bel made the accusations up. There's also a chap named S(e)quin de Florian who may or may not have existed as a French plant to try and help defame them.

>>283592
No. Templars were one of the many crusaders. There were nations and independant orders doing it. The templars were an order, they did banking and escorts but they also did mercenary cavalry.

they were executed for severeal reasons, partially bullshit, partially the fact nobody wanted to deal with taxless and lawless soldiers and you can't revoke their rights.