[xone]

Wouldn’t that be a form of limited monarchy?

How so, there was no succession, God picked the prophets and judges. No taxes for the king, no conscription for a standing army. That was the plan until the people went to Samuel and wanted a king so they could be like the surrounding countries. The trade didn't always work out.

Alexander the Great's empire was divided by 4 of his generals. Additionally, the Romans had no king by the time they made it to Judea.

[NRx]

How so, there was no succession, God picked the prophets and judges. No taxes for the king, no conscription for a standing army. That was the plan until the people went to Samuel and wanted a king so they could be like the surrounding countries. The trade didn't always work out. Alexander the Great's empire was divided by 4 of his generals. Additionally, the Romans had no king by the time they made it to Judea.

Not all monarchies are hereditary. The existence or lack thereof of an army or how the state is supported are not indications of a monarchy. Indeed there have been elective monarchies, Poland, The Holy Roman Empire were elective and the Papacy is to this day.

The important thing is that in a legitimate Christian monarchy there is a proper respect for tradition including the rights of the people and some limits on power. But perhaps most importantly there is an acknowledgment that all authority comes from God. And that those entrusted with power, whether princes or Congressmen, are deeply answerable to God for the exercise of their powers.