1865 年，随着内战结束，美国进入到战后恢复重建和经济发展阶段，与之相 应，军队建设，特别是陆军建设也提上了议事日程。而不久后的 1871 年，俾斯麦依靠着强大的普鲁士军队，战胜奥地利、法国等欧陆强国，完成了德意志的统 一。如此显赫的功绩不仅引起了全欧洲的侧目，而且也吸引了美国的目光，并在 19 世纪最后 30 年，逐渐形成以谢尔曼、厄普顿、麦克莱伦、伯恩塞德、瓦格纳、 斯科菲尔德等为代表，由一大批内战将领和军事理论家组成的“军事改革派”。他们深知美国的陆军建设弊端丛生，与经济发展严重不匹配，必须改革，而德国（普鲁士）战胜法国的赫赫战功，使他们不约而同地将关注点从传统的英法转向新兴 的德国。通过在德国的观察和对欧洲军事最新发展变化的研究，乃至提升到国会 立法的层次，他们把自己对德国军事发展的看法以评论或者论著的方式记录下来并发表，为军界和知识界提供德国军事发展的资料的同时，也为美国这一时期的军事改革提供了可供参考的样板和理论上的支持。这种可供参考的样板，涉及到指挥体制、军队编制、军事教育这三大层面，不过由于美德两国完全不同的历史传统，美国军界对这些改革思想的接受过程可以说非常曲折。直到 1898 年美西战争之后，当时的陆军部长鲁特看到在这场“小而辉煌”的战争背后，是军队管理和组织上的混乱，在未来进一步的国际竞争中将处于不利地位，因而果断决定发 起陆军的全面改革，采用“军事改革派”在德国影响下提出的改革思想，将他们的 改革计划全部付诸实施，并在一战爆发前后，在美国面临被欧洲战事所影响的背景下，由伍德发起大规模的备战运动，深化了鲁特改革的成果。这样的一个历史进程，也是美国陆军从内战后对近代德国的军事体制从接触到认知，再到逐步接受，最终在 20 世纪初为我所用，指导美国的陆军体制改革和现代陆军建设，进而在 1917 到 1918 年参与一战，并最终战胜德国的过程。而本文所要研究的对象，也正是 1865 到 1918 年这半个多世纪的时间里，美国军界对德国军事体制从 接触和认知到“为我所用”的扬弃过程，更是在此基础上，从提出理论到付诸实践， 展开陆军改革的一系列进程。

论文共分为四章。第一章“美国陆军改革的前奏”，主要论述美国陆军改革的历史背景，以及德国陆军体制的特点，并说明正是这些特点吸引了美国军界的目光。第二章“美国军界根据德国体制提出的改革思想”，主要从指挥体制、陆军编制、军事教育三个层面论述美国陆军“改革派”的思想。第三章“19 到 20 世纪之交美国陆军改革实践及其德国因素”和第四章“1910 年后美国陆军改革 的深化和成果”则主要论述这一时期陆军改革的全面实践和深化，以及在一战当中的成果检验的过程。

通过研究，可以窥见美国从 1865 到 1918 年的陆军改革进程，就是一个吸收以德国为代表的欧洲最先进的陆军体制，完成了美国由传统陆军向现代陆军转型的过程，而另一方面，美国军界虽然这一时期对德国投入了很多的关注，但是无论是立足点还是服务对象，都是美国自身，他们对德国军事体制的各种评论，都 不可能照搬德国，而是结合美国自身的民主特点，通过扬弃，最终实现双方优点的兼容，而这才是他们的核心目的。

In 1865, with the end of the Civil War, the United States entered a stage of postwar recovery, reconstruction, and economic development. Correspondingly, military construction, especially army construction, was also put on the agenda. In 1871, Bismarck relied on a strong Prussian army to defeat European powers such as Austria and France, completing the unification of Germany. Such remarkable achievements not only caught the attention of the whole of Europe, but also attracted the attention of the United States. In the last 30 years of the 19th century, the “Military Reform Faction” was gradually formed, represented by Sherman, Upton, McClellan, Burnside, Wagner, Schofield, and a large number of internal war generals and military theorists. They were well aware that the United States had numerous shortcomings in its army construction, which were seriously mismatched with economic development and required reform. However, Germany’s (or Prussia’s) victory over France led them to shift their focus from traditional England and France to emerging Germany. Through observation in Germany and research on the latest developments and changes in European military, and even to the level of parliamentary legislation, they recorded and published their views on Germany’s military development in the form of comments or writings, providing information on Germany's military development for the military and intellectual circles, as well as providing reference models and theoretical support for the military reform of the United States during this period. This model that can be used as a reference involves three levels: command system, military organization, and military education. However, due to the completely different historical traditions of the two countries, the acceptance process of these reform ideas by the US military circle can be said to be very tortuous. Until after the Spanish American War in 1898, the then Secretary of War, Root, saw that behind this “small but glorious” war was chaos in military management and organization, which would put the US at a disadvantage in further international competition in the future. Therefore, he decisively decided to launch a comprehensive reform of the army, adopting the reform ideas proposed by the “Military Reform Faction” under the influence of Germany, and implementing all their reform plans. Before and after the outbreak of World War I, in the context of European wars affecting the United States, Wood initiated a large-scale war preparedness movement, deepening the achievements of Root's reform. This historical process was also the process of the US Army's touch, recognition, and gradual acceptance of the modern German military system after the Civil War, and ultimately used by the US itself in the early 20th century to guide the reform of the US military system and the construction of the modern army. From 1917 to 1918, the US participated in World War I and ultimately defeated Germany. The object of this article is also the sublating process of the American’s touch, recognition and making good use of the German military system during the period of more than half a century from 1865 to 1918. Based on this, a series of processes were carried out from proposing theories to putting them into practice to carry out army reform.

The paper is divided into four chapters. Chapter One “Prelude to US Army Reform” mainly discusses the historical background of US Army reform, as well as the characteristics of the German Army system, and explains that it is these characteristics that have attracted the attention of the US military community. Chapter 2 “Reform Ideas Proposed by the US Military Community Based on the German System” mainly discusses the thinking of the US Army “reformists” from three aspects: commanding system, army organization, and military education. Chapter 3 “The Practice of US Army Reform at the Turn of the 19th and 20th Century and Its German Factors” and Chapter 4 “ The Deepening and Achievements of US Army Reform After 1910” mainly discuss the comprehensive practice and deepening of army reform during this period, as well as the process of verifying achievements in World War I.

Through the research, we can glimpse the Army reform process of the United States from 1865 to 1918, which absorbed the most advanced European Army system represented by Germany and completed the transformation of the United States from a traditional Army to a modern Army. On the other hand, although the US military circle paid a lot of attention to Germany during this period, both the focus and the target audience were the US itself. Their various comments on the German military system could not be copied from Germany, but rather aimed to combine the democratic characteristics of the United States and ultimately achieve compatibility between the advantages of both sides by sublation, which was their core goal.