In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
These facts almost amount to a statement that SAMUEL wrote Judges.  It is utterly inconceivable to this writer than any person whomsoever, who might have lived at any of the "later periods" assigned to the writing of Judges could possibly have entertained such a foolish and erroneous notion. It was only in the times of Samuel, before the monarchy had been experienced, that these comments would have been written.  Furthermore, they could not have come from the earlier part of Samuel's life, because, at first, he was opposed to the establishment of the monarchy.  This restricts the probability of the time when Judges was written to the "honeymoon phase" of the reign of Saul.  Who can believe that any Israelite living after God's chosen people had witnessed the conduct of any of their reprobate kings could have entertained for a single moment the naive notion in evidence here that, IF Israel had had a king, none of these shameful things would have happened?