Michael Walzer, The Jewish Political Tradition
[A king] participates in the work of the court, and he is subject to its judgements. But this subjection depends on his own agreement: the king is subject only if he subjects himself, which only Davidic kings are imaged to do.
When [a non-Davidic] king defies the court, as Yannai did and as others are expected to do, the ideal structure collapses; there is no restraint at all on a ruler who refuses to be restrained.
Moshe Halbertal and Stephen Holmes, The Beginning of Politics: Power in the Biblical Book of Samuel
Hierarchically organized power is defined by the power-wielder's capacity to act from a distance. Delegation involves the capacity to create extended causal chains, embroiling and implicating multiple subordinates whose actions radiate downward from an apex or outward from a center. The longer the chain, the greater the power of the sovereign who acts invisibly through its multiple links. It is as if the arm of the sovereign literally reached its remote objective through a succession of proxies carrying out his commands.
Naphtali Tzvi Judah Berlin, Ha'amek Davar, Deuteronomy 17:14
Some states cannot tolerate a monarchic regime, whereas others, without a monarch, would be like a ship without a captain. An issue like this cannot be decided by the binding force of a positive commandment. For matters of collective policy involve [dealing with] life-threatening situations in which positive commandments are overridden. Therefore, there can be no definite imperative to appoint a king, as long as the people have not consented to the monarchic yoke through seeing the surrounding nations being governed more adequately [by kings]. Only then is there a positive commandment upon the Sanhedrin to appoint a king ... It is for this reason that for three hundred years, while the tabernacle resided in Shilo, there was no king, [i.e.,] for lack of the people's consent.