Since theory-building is inseparable from its empirical contexts, there are limits to deriving hypotheses from theories informed by other empirical cases for our object of study. Therefore, this chapter provides an in-depth introduction to the cases analysed in the volume “Narrating the Rule of Law”—Czechia, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. As it shows, drawing on various studies of the region, certain developments in these countries may have affected narratives about the rule of law in parliaments that are either missing or not discussed in detail in the current rule of law research, while other factors are possibly overemphasised. Specifically, we discuss the perhaps limited relevance of party ideologies, the massive post-1989 power shifts, conflicts over the post-1989 developments and the consequences of institutional choices, particularities of the relationship between politicians and judges, and the role of the EU. For scholars studying the rule of law from a theoretical perspective and for EU scholars unfamiliar with East Central Europe, this chapter provides detailed information to understand the actors’ background and experiences that might inform their rule of law narratives.