> Knights could have been thugs or even warlords but they weren't. Not because they would have been stopped by the state, which were fairly small and weak at the time, but because they largely chose not to.

> And many crusaders went further than that. They chose a risky expedition often at a great expense of their families for no discernible earthly benefit.

You mean invading a foreign country because they worship the same god in a different way, and perhaps killing everyone there that oppose the invasion?

Also, I don't remember about this particular case, but it was usual to distribute some of the conquered land/money/slaves between the soldiers.