The Syrian Civil War has been characterized by fragmentation, leading to the creation of various institutions and actors. On one level, there is a conglomeration of armed opposition groups vying for territory and control through both military means and governance. On another level, there are different institutions within Syrian Civil Society attempting to provide services and raise awareness for different issues through non-violent means. While these two different actors are both engaging in the same conflict landscape, civil society organizations and armed groups have emerged as different, parallel authorities. This research seeks to explore the dynamic between these two different actors. With both of these actors operating within the same geographic space and political climate, this begs the question of why have civil society organizations and armed opposition groups not coalesced, but rather operated as parallel authorities? This research seeks to understand the agency of these two different oppositional authorities as well as how they have remained separate entities. This paper argues that civil society and armed opposition derive their authority from different factors which provides for legitimacy in different spheres. The research draws on both academic sources, popular literature, and social media to determine differentiating factors between civil society organizations and armed opposition groups such as social bases, sources of support, funding, relations with other oppositional groups, and pre-war networks. This research provides insight into the agency of both civil society and armed groups within the Syrian context as well as how these two different actors interact within the conflict landscape.