This chapter develops an analytical framework for addressing the legitimation of different forms of organized violence. The chapter distinguishes between normative, legal, and empirical approaches to legitimacy, and moving beyond essentialist and normative definitions of legitimate violence, adopts an empirical perspective that views legitimacy as a contingent and dynamic outcome of the process of drawing and redrawing the boundary of acceptable state action, which can be captured in discursive struggles. The proposed framework analyzes discourses of legitimation through five key components: the referred object, the positive or negative valuation, the parameters invoked to justify the action, the rhetorical strategies, and the ideational sources that shape and constrain what can be authoritatively said. These elements reveal how dominant discourses form an apparent consensus, naturalizing certain uses of force. The framework emphasizes co-constitution between agency and structure, showing how actors draw on shared beliefs and historical narratives to forge legitimacy.