It matters not why they are created
Wrong. Of course it matters whether they're created to serve a feudal purpose or not.
...the bannerettes and knights answer to the archduke, not the emperor, unless in the domain of Sylea. And can be relieved by either the Archduke or the Emperor... vassals in all important respects.
Do you have any examples of bannerettes and knights "answering" to the archduke who appointed them? The one example I can remember is of the Duke of Deneb knighting the four PCs in the TD "Grand Tour" adventures, which he did on behalf of the Emperor and gave them a free trip to Capital. Which doesn't prove anything one way or the other, since the Domain of Deneb had no archduke at the time.
And canon provides that, for the subsector dukes, at least, they are the superior of all the admiralty in their see;
So, historically, were royal governors. That just proves that subsector dukes are,
ex officio, superior to fleet admirals. We also have one very prominent example that shows that subsector dukes are not superior to sector admirals (Santanocheev and Norris; every other "two-star" in the FFW game and Norris).
...their huscarles are for their fief alone,
Huscarles are household troops. I've always
assumed that they couldn't be imperialized without the consent of their noble, but the one example we have (Norris' regiment) simply has the unit imperialized at the start of the 5FW, with nothing said one way or the other about his consent. For all the evidence we have, huscarles are subject to imperialization without any consent at all.
Be that as it may, there's nothing to show that other Imperial troops are subject to their dukes as a function of feudal obligation and not as a function of the duke being a direct representative of the Emperor.
...and there is, canonically, no standing "Imperial Army"... only the assembled armies of the various worlds, worlds who officially are represented to the Imperium by those same Emperor-Appointed-Nobles, and the huscarles of those same nobles.
What canon? I thought you didn't accept GT material as canon? :devil:
I could be wrong, but I don't think even GF states that the Unified Armies are under the control of their dukes
as opposed to the Emperor rather than under the control of their dukes as representatives of the Emperor.
As for the non-existence of the Imperial Army, I recently saw a quote about the Scouts that I'm sorry I didn't remember back when we were playtesting GF. It said (paraphrased) that the Scouts was an organization every bit as powerful as the Imperial Navy and the Imperial Army. That implies, of course, that the Imperial Army is an organization in its own right, and roughly as powerful as the Navy and the Scouts. Not so?
Therefore, the Imperial Army, outside of time of war, functionally is the huscarles plus a few HQ's here and there, and the Office of Standards.
As I tried to convince Doug Berry back then, if the Imperial Army didn't exist, someone would have to invent it. In the sense that if there's no Imperial Army to coordinate at sector and higher levels, then the Army of the Domain of Sylea (if it exists) or the Army of the Duchy of Core (if it exists) or the Army of Sylea (which most certainly does exist) would take over those functions by default. Much like the Horse Guards in England assumed the functions of the non-existent 'Generalty' and did for the King's Army what the Admiralty did for the Royal Navy.
Not that the existence or non-existence if the Imperial Army says anything about the feudal or non-feudal nature of the relationship between the Emperor and his dukes.
Hans