The Statue of Victory at Colchester. Dr C.J. Simpson writes: Over the past few years, there has been a difference of opinion registered in these pages concerning the Temple of Claudius at Colchester and evidence for the establishment there of a cult of Rome and the living emperor in the years following the Claudian conquest and before Claudius' death in A.D. 54. In an attempt at a comprehensive demolition of my suggestion that there may well have been a temple to the living Claudius at Colchester (at least as a sanctuary or as a building whose construction had begun), Duncan Fishwick has once again referred to the Tacitean account of a Statue of Victory at the Roman colony. 281 Rather than continue the debate concerning Claudius' temple per se, with my suspicion that all religious matters in the 'periphery' were not rigidly prescribed and tightly controlled from the 'centre', I would prefer to focus on the Victory. This has been cited as an important feature in Fishwick's proposed 'architectonic correspondence' (hence similarity in cult) between Colchester and the monument of the Three Gauls at Lyon. 282 (As we know from numismatic evidence, there were Victories flanking the altar at Lyon. 283) Although Fishwick points to Tacitean errors, he apparently believes in the reality of the Victory in the historian's account. 284 Just prior to the Boudiccan sack of Camulodunum, according to Tacitus, the Colchester statue toppled for no obvious reason 'ac retro conversum quasi cederet hostibus' ('with its back turned as if in retreat from the enemy', Ann. XIV.32). 285 The sense is clearly that this unexpected event was a portent of the defeat and utter rout of the Roman occupiers. Nevertheless, whatever may be the plausibility of an actual Statue of Victory at Camulodunum, it is most likely that Tacitus' report is not based on any reality at the Roman colony but has its foundations elsewhere as literary invention. It is a literary topos not a recollection of reality that has been served up to Tacitus' educated readers in Rome. Shortly before the pivotal Battle of Sentinum in 295 B.C., according to Zonaras vm.i, a bronze Statue of Victory descended of its own accord from its stone pedestal in the Roman Forum, turned to face the enemy, and even started forward. This omen was interpreted favourably to indicate Rome's military strength. 286 The two stories in Zonaras and Tacitus are to be compared. First, in both tales, 'Victoria', which is cognate in Latin with 'vincere', is entirely appropriate to signalling future military success or reverse. 287 More significant, however, is the fact that in both reports there are a non-Roman enemy and a Victory who portends disaster or triumph by her unexpected movement from a pedestal ('nulla palam causa' Ann. XIV.32; 'aytomatos', Zonaras VIII.1) and by her subsequent changed orientation. 288 The coincidental appearance in both reports of a portentious Victory suggests to me that the Tacitean account is a variation of the tale preserved by Zonaras and, thus, is invention. Given the prob...