Abstract
The author comments on the ways in which Czech historians of the last two decades have appropriated the concept of political culture from political science. He claims that, within political science or social sciences more broadly, one should distinguish two different approaches to political culture: 1. the behavioralist concept of political culture as introduced by Almond and Verba which is closely tied up with the quantitative survey research technique and a positivist epistemology (denoted here as the P-type concept of political culture); and 2. the set of interpretative or culturalist approaches to political culture, which do not form a consistent group, but share a commitment to a postpositivist epistemology (the K-type of political culture concept).
History and, in particular, cultural history, with its interpretive and constructivist bent, is shown to be predominantly associated with the K-type concept of political culture. The author then proceeds to discuss the work of those Czech historians who have made use of the concept of political culture adopted from political science.
The literature under review gives evidence of an unresolved tension between the P- and K-type of political culture concepts. Another conclusion is that the study of political culture of the P-type in those periods for which no survey data is available faces insuperable difficulties.