I think you've confused the two tribes Paullus. Arminius was a Cheruscian and, as Ahta says, the Chatti can't have revolted wholesale since otherwise Asprenas wouldn't have left the frontier opposite their lands open. On the other hand, some Chatti may have been involved, since one of the Varian aquilae was later found in Chattian hands.

Ahta wrote:

It seems to me that Wells is ignoring a fundamental Roman habit, when pacifying (pacare) a region after subjecting: soldiers and warriors were used to form auxiliary troops, with loyal nobles (those who provided members of their own families, particularly children, as hostages) and Italic officers being in command. Apart from the men essentially needed for farming etc. the younger men were serving as auxiliary soldiers in alae and cohortes.

And, as we've discussed before Ahta, this interpretation is based entirely on the assumption - on the strength of one Latin phrase - that this practice was (i) uniform in these situations and (ii) applied in this case. If this were the case, it is very strange that none of the sources mention it. In fact, though we can assume that some Cheruscian auxiliaries were involved in the battle, there is no mention at all of native troops of any kind turning against the Romans.

Again, this modern German interpretation seems too much like a politically correct attempt to make what was a tribal (not a proto-nationalist) uprising into something else as a way of distancing modern scholarship from the nationalist stench of the Nazis. Distancing oneself from anachronistic projections of nationalism is fine, but not at the expense of good history.

Cheers,
Thiu

Visit CLADES VARIANA
Help create the film of Varus' lost legions ...