Abstract: In recent decades,some scholars have reinterpreted "co-governance between the emperor and scholarofficials" as a defining state policy and administrative practice of the Song Dynasty.This view,however,lacks a consistent definition and suffers from logical gaps.An overestimation of remonstrance institutions and scholar-official influence,along with an idealized view of certain ruler-minister relationships,has fostered this impression,which may reflect either ephemeral realities or later constructions.Beneath a veneer of shared governance lay far more complex power dynamics.In practice,the concept remained largely aspirational:a Southern Song literary idealization or an expression of the "imperial preceptor" ethos.Contemporary comparisons with Western governance models further project a sense of political precocity onto the Song Dynasty's rule,distorting historical truth.A rigorous reassessment requires avoiding simplistic or presentist interpretations.By returning to Song-era sources and adopting a self-referential perspective,we can better grasp the dynasty's authentic political character.Applying historical criticism and dismissing anachronistic assumptions will lead us closer to the reality of Song Dynasty history.