The Roman villa of Salar (Granada). The sculptural program in archaeological context^*This work was carried out within the framework of the Project HAR2017-89004-P, sponsored by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad of the Government of Spain and with ERDF Funds (Fondos FEDER), and the Project PID2019-105294GB-100/AEI/10.13039/501100011033, sponsored by the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación of the Government of Spain and with ERDF Funds (Fondos FEDER); as well as the Research Groups HUM 143 and HUM 402 (Plan Andaluz de Investigación of the Junta de Andalucía). We thank the City Council of Salar (Granada) for supporting the systematic archaeological excavation project in villa Salar, approved by the Junta de Andalucía (Consejería de Cultura y Patrimonio Histórico) as a General Research Project.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Roman villa is located in the present province of Granada (Spain) within the municipality of Salar (Fig. 1), which occupies the middle Singilis valley, or present Genil River, all within the territory of the Roman province Baetica and ascribed to the conventus Astigitanus. To which ager it belonged to is not known; the nearest Roman city within the province of Granada is Ilurco (Pinos Puente), approximately 45 km away (Morales and Castillo, 2009Morales Rodríguez, E. and Castillo Rueda, M. Á. (2009). “El ager ilurconensis”. Florentia Iliberritana, 20, pp. 269-308.), or Vlisi (Archidona) in the province of Malaga, approximately 35 km away (Beltrán and Loza, 2012Beltrán Fortes, J. and Loza Azuaga, M. L. (2012). “Esculturas romanas de Ulisi (Archidona, Málaga)”. Spal, 21, pp. 39-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/spal.2012.i21.02 ). Literary and epigraphic sources mention several other Roman cities in this same area, Baxo, Vesci Faventia, Ilipula Laus or Calecula; however, their exact locations are not known¹ An approach to this territory in Roman times can be seen in González Román, 2001. For the specific case of the nearby territory of Loja, whether there was or not a Roman city: Gómez Comino, 2011.. Archaeological evidence of the villa was uncovered accidentally during the construction of the municipal wastewater treatment station in November 2004. A research team carried out an initial phase of excavations between 2006 and 2013, uncovering a triclinium associated with a nymphaeum and part of the eastern peristyle corridor or ambulacrum, as well as the beginning of the southern colonnade (González and El-Amrany, 2013González Martín, C. and El Amrani Paaza, T. (2013). Guía Arqueológica. Villa romana de Salar (Granada). Salar: Diputación de Granada.; González Martín, 2014González Martín, C. (2014). “Poblamiento y territorio en el curso medio del Genil en época romana: nuevas aportaciones arqueológicas. La villa romana de Salar”. Florentia Iliberritana, 25, pp. 175-194. and 2016González Martín, C. (2016). “Salar (Salar)”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed.,Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 315-323.).

A new team began work again in 2016 and has continued annually up to present² Research team from the University of Granada, coordinated by María Isabel Fernández García, and led by Julio M. Román Punzón and Pablo Ruiz Montes, of the University of Granada, and Manuel Moreno Alcaide, of the University of Málaga; as collaborators, the authors María Luisa Loza Azuaga (Instituto Andaluz del Patrimonio Histórico, Seville) and José Beltrán Fortes (University of Seville). A General Research Project has been approved by the Consejería de Cultura y Patrimonio Histórico of the Junta de Andalucía to continue research work until at least 2023., excavating a large part of the western peristyle corridor, as well as several rooms that open onto it (Fig. 2). The decoration found in this area contains outstanding mosaics, mural paintings that imitate marbles (for Baetica see: Fernández Díaz, 2010Fernández Díaz, A. (2010). “Pintura”. In: León, P., ed., Arte Romano de la Bética. III. Mosaico. Pintura. Manufacturas. Sevilla: Fundación Focus-Abengoa, pp. 192-273.), as well as statuary, on which this paper focuses, consisting of three exceptional pieces: two nymph statues found in the nymphaeum and a statue of Venus recovered in the western corridor of the peristyle. The first two pieces have been described by the discoverers (González and El-Amrani, 2013, pp. 48-51González Martín, C. and El Amrani Paaza, T. (2013). Guía Arqueológica. Villa romana de Salar (Granada). Salar: Diputación de Granada.; González Martín, 2014, pp. 177-179González Martín, C. (2014). “Poblamiento y territorio en el curso medio del Genil en época romana: nuevas aportaciones arqueológicas. La villa romana de Salar”. Florentia Iliberritana, 25, pp. 175-194.), whereas, the third has already been analyzed individually (Loza et al., 2020Loza Azuaga, M. L., Beltrán Fortes, J., Román Punzón, J. M., Fernández García, M. I. Moreno Alcaide, M., Ruiz Montes, P. and Ramoso Noguera, J. (2020). “La villa de Salar (Granada). un nuevo descubrimiento escultórico”. In: Noguera, J. M. and Ruiz, L., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania IX (Yecla 2019), Yakka. Revista de Estudios Yeclanos, 22. Yecla-Murcia: Ayuntamiento de Yecla and Universidad de Murcia, pp. 423-441.).

2. THE TRICLINIUM NYMPHAEUM STATUES

The triclinium of villa Salar included a fountain consisting of a wide U-shaped perimeter channel that partially surrounded the room and a nymphaeum located at the rear or eastern wall (Román et al., 2018aRomán Punzón, J. M., Moreno Alcaide, M., Ruiz Montes, P. and Fernández García, M. I. (2018a). “Villa romana de Salar (Salar, Granada)”. In: Yacimientos arqueológicos y artefactos. Las colecciones del Departamento de Prehistoria y Arqueología. Granada: Universidad de Granada, I, pp. 104-107. and 2018bRomán Punzón, J. M., Moreno Alcaide, M., Ruiz Montes, P. and Ramos Noguera, J. (2018b). “La importancia de la investigación, conservación y puesta en valor del patrimonio histórico local: el ejemplo de la villa romana de Salar”. Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología de la Universidad de Granada, 28, pp. 233-257.; Román, 2019Román Punzón, J. M. (2019). “¡Si Apuleyo levantase la cabeza! Lujo y ostentación en la villa romana de Salar (Granada)”. Andalucía en la Historia, 64, pp. 40-45. ; Moreno et al., in pressMoreno Alcaide, M., Román Punzón, J. M. and Ruiz Montes, P. Moreno Alcaide, Ramos Noguera, J. and Fernández García, M. I. (in press). “Arquitectura monumental en la villa romana de Salar (Granada)”. In: Actas del Congreso Internacional Las villas romanas bajoimperiales de Hispania. Palencia. 15-17 noviembre, 2018.). A large apsidal basin and the fountain source itself, located at the back, completed this water display. It flows over an inclined surface, creating a small waterfall. The inclined slope that descends from the niche to the second level of the fountain is covered with speleothem fragments; that is, a mineral deposit, which is formed by the precipitation of calcium carbonate deposits in caves, taking on a variety of forms such as stalagmites and stalactites (Fig. 3, A-B). This carbonate formation must have been intentionally extracted from one of the caves close to the town to be used in the decoration of the fountain, evoking a nymphaeum or sacred grotto consecrated to the nymphs, according to Pomponius Mela (II, 3). Hence, a large number of nymph votive offerings modeled in the form of grottoes are known, alluding to nymph sanctuaries located in caves. The water from this grotto-like nymphaeum poured into the basin and hydraulic mortar coated canal.

The triclinium floor, situated below the fountain floor level, is paved with a geometric pattern mosaic (Marín, 2014-2015Marín Díaz, P. (2014-2015). “Qualis villa, talis vita. El mosaico romano como fuente documental”. Anales de Arqueología Cordobesa, 25-26, pp.169-190.) (Fig. 4), while the lower walls are reveted with marble. The eastern perimeter corridor or ambulacrum opens onto the peristyle by means of a large entranceway flanked by two columns. This corridor is also situated above the lateral ambulacra, joining with them using two steps, as seen in the southern part of the perisytle (Hidalgo, 2016, p. 194Hidalgo Prieto, R. (2016): “Arquitectura residencial y representativa”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 175-248.). The eastern corridor is paved with a marine thiasos mosaic, the western part depicting a nereid riding on a ketos or sea monster (Fig. 5), dated, more likely, to the second half of the 4^th century AD than to early 3^rd century AD, as proposed in previous studies (Marín, 2016, pp. 438-439Marín Díaz, P. (2016). Otium, salubritas, amoenitas. Decoraciones musivas y pictóricas romanas en la Vega de Granada. Diss. Granada: Universidad de Granada.). Two features relate villa Salar to the nearby villa Gabia (Gutiérrez Rodríguez et al., 2016Gutiérrez Rodríguez, M., Orfila Pons, M., Sánchez López, E., Marín Díaz, P., Moreno Pérez, S. and Maeso Taviro, C. (2016). “Gabia (Gabia la Grande)”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed.,Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 298-304.). In the first place, the use of tubi fittili of the type “terracotta vaulting tube with nozzle” (Lancaster, 2015, pp. 106-108 and 115-118Lancaster, L. (2015). Innovative Vaulting in the Architecture of the Roman Empire. 1st to 4th centuries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.) for some of the vaults (Moreno, Román and Ruiz, 2019Moreno Alcaide, M., Román Punzón, J. M. and Ruiz Montes, P. (2019): “El uso de tubi fittili para cubiertas abovedadas en la Hispania romana. Revisión bibliográfica y estado de la cuestión”. Spal, 28.1, pp. 131-156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/spal.2019.i28.06 ). In villa Salar, they were most certainly employed in the nymphaeum vaulting, as various fragments were recovered in the fill here (Moreno, Román and Ruiz, 2019, pp. 138-140Moreno Alcaide, M., Román Punzón, J. M. and Ruiz Montes, P. (2019): “El uso de tubi fittili para cubiertas abovedadas en la Hispania romana. Revisión bibliográfica y estado de la cuestión”. Spal, 28.1, pp. 131-156. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12795/spal.2019.i28.06 ). Secondly, the presence of pieces of wall opera sectilia; those from villa Gabia were found in a cryptoporticus dated to the 4^th century AD (Gutiérrez Rodíguez et al., 2016, pp. 299-301Gutiérrez Rodríguez, M., Orfila Pons, M., Sánchez López, E., Marín Díaz, P., Moreno Pérez, S. and Maeso Taviro, C. (2016). “Gabia (Gabia la Grande)”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed.,Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 298-304.). Also, at the villa suburbana La Estación (Antequera, Málaga), dated to the same period, but located further away, similar opus sectile wall decor has also been documented (Gutiérrez Deza, 2005Gutiérrez Deza, I. (2005). “Sectile figurado de la Villa de la Estación de Antequera”. Mainake, XXVII, pp. 379-394. ; López and Neira, 2010, p. 28López Monteagudo, G. and Neira Jiménez, L. (2010). “Mosaico”. In: León, P., ed., Arte Romano de la Bética. III. Mosaico. Pintura. Manufacturas. Sevilla: Fundación Focus-Abengoa, pp. 17-189.).

A triclinium with a nymphaeum, occupying the rear wall and providing these rooms with water, is a common feature in Roman dwellings. Some cases are very similar to those described by Pliny the Younger (Fornell, 2009Fornell, A. (2009). “Las Epístolas de Plinio el Joven como fuente para el estudio de las villae romanas”. Circe, 13, pp. 139-155.) and can be found in garden settings, for example, in Pompeian houses, being generically referred to as “water triclinia” (Salsa, 1987, p. 138Salsa Prina Ricotti, E. (1987). “The Importance of Water in Roman Garden Triclinia”. In Macdougall, E. B., ed., Ancient Roman Villa Gardens. Washington: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, pp. 135-184.). Triclinia tended to grow larger over time to house a greater number of guests (Dunbabin, 1991Dunbabin, K. M. D. (1991). “Triclinium and stibadium”. In: Slater, W. J., ed.), Dining in a Cassical Context. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 121-148.); the use of stibadia associated with fountains also developed (Morvillez, 2008Morvillez, E. (2008). “Les sigmas-fontaines dans l’Antiquité tardive”. In: Vössing, G. K., ed., Das römische Bankett im Spiegel der Altertumwissenshaft. Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, pp. 37-54.). In the province Baetica, villa El Ruedo (Almedinilla), dated to the 4^th century AD (Carrillo, 2016Carrillo Díaz-Pinés, J. R. (2016). “El Ruedo (Almedinilla)”. In: Hidalgo, R. (ed.), Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 174-185.; Stephenson, 2009, p. 347Stephenson, J. W. (2009). “Villas and aquatic Culture in Late Rome Spain”. In: Kosso, C. and Scott, A., eds., The Nature and Function of Water, Baths, Bathing and Hygiene from Antiquity. Leiden: Brill, pp. 337-360.) houses an outstanding nymphaeum ad edicola, decorated with an exceptional sculptural program composed of bronze and marble statues, that supplied a stibadium fountain with water (Vaquerizo and Noguera, 1997Vaquerizo Gil, D. and Noguera Celdrán, J. M. (1997). La villa de El Ruedo (Almedinilla, Córdoba). Decoración escultórica e interpretación. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia.). Perhaps, the remains discovered in villa Caserío Silverio Mayorga (Antequera) (see discussion in Hidalgo, 2016, pp. 215-217Hidalgo Prieto, R. (2016): “Arquitectura residencial y representativa”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 175-248.), associated with a unique iconographic assemblage of small-sized statues, can be seen as another example of fountain stibadium (Beltrán and Rodríguez, 2018Beltrán Fortes, J. and Rodríguez Oliva, P. (2018). “La villa romana de Caserío Silverio, de Antequera (Málaga). Estudio de las esculturas”. In: Beltrán, J., Loza, M. L. and Ontiveros, E., eds., Marmora Baeticae. Uso de materiales pétreos en la Bética romana. Estudios arqueológicos y análisis arqueométricos. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 223-249.). Furthermore, the addition of rooms arranged around the same axis allowed the development of multiple stibadia, as seen, for example, in the Lusitanian villa Quinta das Longas (Elvas) with a triple-apsed triclinium (Dunbabin, 1996, p. 77Dunbabin, K. M. D. (1996). “Convivial spaces: Dining and entertainment in the Roman Villa”. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 9, pp. 66-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s1047759400016500 ), associated with an exceptional sculptural assemblage, all dated to the 4^th century AD (Nogales, Carvalho and Almeida, 2004Nogales Basarrate, T., Carvalho, A. and Almeida, M. J. (2004). “El programa decorativo de la Quinta das Longas (Elvas, Portugal). Un modelo excepcional de las villae de la Lusitania”. In: Nogales, T. and Gonçalves, L. J., eds., Actas de la IV Reunión sobre escultura romana en Hispania. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura, pp. 103-156.). The development of multiple triclinia and stibadia made it possible to entertain the guests during dinners with music, theatre, poetry, stunts, etc. Nymphaea would have provided these rooms with an architectural stage-like scaenae frons (Dunbabin, 2008Dunbabin, K. M. D. (2008). “Nec grave nec infacentum: The imagery of convivial entertainment”. In: Vössing, K., ed., Das römische Bankett im Spiegel der Altertumwissenshaft (Düsseldorf, Okt. 2005). Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, pp. 13-26.), refreshing as well the summer evenings and providing a pleasant, soft background murmur (Fornell, 2005, pp. 368-376Fornell, A. (2005). Las villae romanas de la Andalucía Oriental y del Estrecho. Jaén: Universidad de Jaén.). In all, they were carefully planned rooms, following standards and professional guidelines, like those given by Vitruvius (VI, 5, 1-3), and steeped in cultural importance where the love of nature and good taste was clearly expressed in the décor elements (mosaics, mural paintings, sculptures and fabrics).

The villa Salar nymphaeum would have been a niched fountain (Gagniers et al., 1969Gagniers, J. des, Devambez, P., Kahil, L. and Ginouves, R. (1969).Laodicée du Lycos: Le nymphée: campagnes 1961-1963. Paris- Québec: De Boccard and Les Presses de l’Université Laval.) with an inclined wall, following the nymphaeum ad edicola type of Neuerburg (1965, pp. 61-64)Neuerburg, N. 1965: L’architettura delle fontane e dei ninfei nell’Italia antica. Napoli: G. Macchiaroli. and Letzner (1990, type XVI)Letzner, W. (1990). Römische Brunnen und Nymphaea in der westlichen Reichshälfte. Münster: Lit.. In this case, the niche structure was placed behind the space coated with hydraulic mortar. The most frequently mentioned examples are those found in domestic settings of Pompeii and Herculaneum, although at Ostia, in the Casa d’Amore e Psiche, this type appears with a single central niche, therefore, similar to villa Salar, but from a later era (Jansen, 2018, p. 418, fig. 15Jansen, G. M. C. (2018). “Water and water technology in Roman gardens”. In: Jashemski, W. F., Gleason, K. L., Hartswick, K. J. and Malek, A.-A., dirs., Gardens of the Roman Empire. Cambrigde: Cambridge University Press, pp. 402-431.). This first type is less complex than the facade nymphaeum type, which usually has a semicircular central niche flanked by two smaller ones, like the example located next to the triclinium in the Casa del Torello at Pompeii (Soprano, 1950Soprano, P. (1950). “I triclini all’aperto dei Pompei”. In: Maiuri, A., ed., Pompeiana. Raccolta di studi per il secondo centenario degli Scavi di Pompei. Napoli: G. Macchiaroli, pp. 288-310.) with niches capable of housing fountain-figures (Neuerburg, 1965, p. 76Neuerburg, N. 1965: L’architettura delle fontane e dei ninfei nell’Italia antica. Napoli: G. Macchiaroli. ; Anderson, 1990, pp. 221-224Anderson, E. B. (1990). “Fountains and the Roman Dwelling. Casa del Torello in Pompeii”. Jahrbuch des deutschen archäologischen Instituts, 105, pp. 207-236.). As to U-shaped perimeter canal fountains that surround the triclinium walls, the best example in Hispania is Casa dos Repuxos at Conimbriga (Hidalgo, 2016, pp. 208-209Hidalgo Prieto, R. (2016): “Arquitectura residencial y representativa”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 175-248.), although in this case it is lacking the fountain structure. Perhaps another example can be seen in villa Cadima (Los Gallardos) (Llidó, López and Martínez, 2016Llidó López, F., López Jiménez, O. and Martínez Calvo, V. (2016). “Cadima (Los Gallardos)”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 25-35.), but the room in question could either have been a large exedra-shaped fountain pool or a triclinium set on axis with the peristyle. Statues could have been installed in the exedra (Hidalgo, 2016, p. 209Hidalgo Prieto, R. (2016): “Arquitectura residencial y representativa”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 175-248.), as several unstudied sculptural fragments recovered in this room suggest. Among this collection is a female hand with a thyrsus, perhaps a maenad, and a statue support of a personification, possibly a character from a Bacchus thiasos (Llidó, López and Martínez, 2016, p. 30, fig. 7Llidó López, F., López Jiménez, O. and Martínez Calvo, V. (2016). “Cadima (Los Gallardos)”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, II, pp. 25-35.).

Two female sculptures carved in marble were found in the fill that had sealed the nymphaeum exedra of villa Salar. They had served as fountain-figures in the decor program of the water display, perhaps inside the fountain niche or, more likely, installed on the facade. The first figure, representing a nymph (Fig. 6, A-B), was made in white marble, fine to medium-grained with homogeneous texture, coming from Pentelic quarries (Greece) according to petrographic analysis³Archaeometric analysis report on the sculptures found in the Roman villa of Salar (Granada) by Dr. Esther Ontiveros Ortega (reference PPT000506), Geology Laboratory of the Instituto Andaluz de Patrimonio Histórico (IAPH). 19_VS_2 GE sample, petrographic, mineralogical and geochemical study using optical microscopy of light transmitted on thin sheets, X-ray diffraction and X-ray fluorescence. Corresponds to a fine-grained calcic marble (MGS 1mm) with mosaic texture and curved and semi-curved contacts.. It measures 52 cm (height), 18 cm (width) and 11 cm (thick) with an irregular plinth, 4 cm in height. The head and right forearm are missing, also the central torso presents a large fracture, as well as other minor ones in the left arm, shoulder and neck, but all fragments join. A deep slit, running from the nape of the neck to the waist, shows traces of a small lead pipe⁴According to González and El Amrani (2014, p. 49) they are the remains of an iron spike to join with the head, which we consider incorrect., confirming its fountain-statue function. Usually in this model, water poured forth from a vessel held by the figure, but in this case, the figure had been repiped, making it flow from above. The nymph is depicted resting her weight on the left leg, wearing a mantle that covers the underbelly - hinting at view of the pubis - and legs with only the tips of her sandaled feet visible. The upper part of the mantle appears rolled up, as well as on the left forearm, from where it falls into a stepwise ray of folds. As mentioned before, the tilt of the torso was compensated by placing the right arm on a pedestal or low column where an attribute, usually a jug or pitcher, was added to help support the figure. In the study case, the statue support is missing and only a puntello remains on this side. Its stylistic features date it to the 2^nd century AD, possibly, towards the middle or third quarter of the century, and also indicate that it was not manufactured in Hispania, but imported.

This nymph statue is a replica of a well-known Greco-Roman type, which derives from the Aphrodite Pontia Euploia model (e.g. Delivorrias, Berger and Kossatz-Deissmann, 1984, pp. 69-70Delivorrias, G., Berger Dier, G. and Kossatz-Deissmamm (1984). s.v. “Aphrodite”. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. Zürich-München, II, pp. 2-151.; Díez Platas, 1987Díez Platas, F. (1987). Catálogo e iconografía de las ninfas en la Hispania romana. Diss. Madrid: Universidad Complutense.; Inan, 1989Inan, J. (1989). “Aphrodite, Tänzerin oder Wassernymphe”. In: Cain, H. U., Gabelmann, N, H. and Salzmann, D., eds., Festschrift für Nikolaus Himmelmann. Mainz am Rhein: Verlag P. von Zabern, pp. 273-280.; Schroder, 2004, pp. 257-260, n. 150Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.; Aristodemou, 2012, pp. 116-119Aristodemou, G. (2012). Sculptural Decoration of Monumental Nymphaea in the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire. Thessaloniki (in greek).), closely related also to the Venus Marina type, well defined by G. Becatti (1971Becatti G. (1971). Ninfe e divinità marine. Ricerche mitologiche, iconografiche e stilistiche. Studi Miscelanei, 17. Roma: De Luca. ; also, for example, Delivorrias, Berger and Kossatz-Deissmann, 1984, p. 65, n. 554-562Delivorrias, G., Berger Dier, G. and Kossatz-Deissmamm (1984). s.v. “Aphrodite”. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. Zürich-München, II, pp. 2-151.; Loza, 1992Loza Azuaga, M. L. (1992). La decoración escultórica de fuentes en Hispania. Diss. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ; Schröder, 2004, pp. 172-175Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.). Both types were frequently used, although not exclusively, as fountain-figures, differing only in the mantle arrangement. Thus, the Aphrodite Pontia Euploia model was simplified by leaving part of the left arm uncovered and eliminating the usual triangular end arrangement of the mantle in front of the thighs. Some 20 Roman replicas of this type have been documented and debates focus on its origin -whether in Rhodes in the 2^nd century BC or Alexandria towards the end of the century (Inan, 1989Inan, J. (1989). “Aphrodite, Tänzerin oder Wassernymphe”. In: Cain, H. U., Gabelmann, N, H. and Salzmann, D., eds., Festschrift für Nikolaus Himmelmann. Mainz am Rhein: Verlag P. von Zabern, pp. 273-280.; discussion in Schröder, 2004, pp. 275-260Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.) - or if it represents a nymph or the goddess Venus, although “la estatua fue transformada en una Afrodita sólo en tiempos romanos” (Schröder, 2004, p. 259Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.).

Statue supports were usually placed next to the left leg, although in the nymph or Venus statue from villa Salar it appears on the opposite side. Also, the coiled arm bracelets have been left out, and the mantle arrangement and its folds are quite simple. However, its interest lies in the fact that it is the first representation of this Roman sculpture type documented up until now in Hispania⁵The Prado Museum Venus or nymph, dated between 75-100 AD, is not come from Hispania, but was originally part of Christine of Sweden’s collection in Rome (Schröder, 2004, pp. 257-260, n. 150). Nor is the Venus Marina statue of the Museo de Zaragoza Spanish, but originally part of the Marquis of Villahermosa collection (Mora, 2001, p. 135, fig. 7).. Other figures have been documented, but in very poor condition, making it impossible to establish their types, as the two small fragmentary sculptures from Lusitania, one from Ança in the Museo Nacional Machado de Castro (Coimbra) collection (Loza, 1992, pp. 438-439, n. 96, lám. LXXXIXLoza Azuaga, M. L. (1992). La decoración escultórica de fuentes en Hispania. Diss. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ; Díez Platas, 2013, p. 65Díez Platas, F. (2013). “Agua de mármol: sobre las ninfas hispanorromanas”. In: F. Acuña, F. and Casal, R., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania VII. Homenaje al Prof. Dr. Alberto Balil. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, pp. 57-70.) and the other in the Museo Regional of Evora (Loza, 1992, pp. 447-448, no. 96, lam. LXXXIXLoza Azuaga, M. L. (1992). La decoración escultórica de fuentes en Hispania. Diss. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ; Díez Platas, 2013, p. 65Díez Platas, F. (2013). “Agua de mármol: sobre las ninfas hispanorromanas”. In: F. Acuña, F. and Casal, R., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania VII. Homenaje al Prof. Dr. Alberto Balil. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, pp. 57-70.). Also, a larger and well preserved sculpture found in the Lusitanian city of Augusta Emerita (Mérida) is posed like the Salar copy, but, even though its right arm is resting on a column where a jug lays horizontally, its general iconography is more akin to the semi-drapped Venus Pudica type (Loza, 1992, pp. 424-427, n. 76, lam. LXXVLoza Azuaga, M. L. (1992). La decoración escultórica de fuentes en Hispania. Diss. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ).

A second figure was discovered next to the nymph sculpture described above, in this case, a nymph with a shell (Fig. 7, A-B). It was carved in white marble, most likely local stone⁶The petrographic analysis (vid., supra, note 3) did not reach an exact conclusion. Sample 19_VS_1 GE (IAPH Geology Laboratory) corresponds to a calcic marble, with heteroblastic texture, MGS >2 mm and straight and sutureed grain contact., visually identified by its macroscopic aspect and dolomitic properties with marble from the southern region of Sierra Mijas (Málaga) (Beltrán and Loza, 2003Beltrán Fortes, J. and Loza Azuaga, M. L. (2003). El mármol de Mijas. Explotación, comercio y uso en época antigua. Mijas: Museo Histórico Etnológico de Mijas. ). In any case, the use of local marble ensures that it was produced in a local workshop towards the end of the 2^nd century AD or, more likely, the beginning of the 3^rd century AD. It is known that local workshops manufactured statuary with marbles extracted from Mijas (Málaga) quarries up until the Severan period (Beltrán and Loza, 2003Beltrán Fortes, J. and Loza Azuaga, M. L. (2003). El mármol de Mijas. Explotación, comercio y uso en época antigua. Mijas: Museo Histórico Etnológico de Mijas. ; Beltrán et al., 2018Beltrán Fortes, J., Loza Azuaga, M. L., Melero García, F. and Ontiveros Ortega, E. (2018). “Marmora de Cartima (Cártama, Málaga)”. In: Beltrán, J., Loza M. L. and Ontiveros, E., eds., Marmora Baeticae. Uso de materiales pétreos en la Bética romana. Estudios arqueológicos y análisis arqueométricos. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 75-112.). The figure is preserved only from the waist down, measuring 42 cm in height and 24.5 cm in width with a plinth, curved in the front and left side fragmented, 7 cm in height. The mantle falls along the back, surrounds the hips and opens on the side, exposing the legs and bare feet. It holds a large shell in both hands, covering the abdomen and pubic area, bored with a hole, like a labrum, from which water poured forth into the fountain. This hole appears also at the back, boring through the statue almost horizontally.

The standing nymph holding a shell is one of the most common types of fountain-statues, stemming back to the 3^rd century BC Hellenistic period, although it also has iconographic similarities with Aphrodite representations that derive from sculptural prototypes that inspired the 4^th-3^rd centuries BC creations, as G. Becatti has pointed out (Becatti, 1971Becatti G. (1971). Ninfe e divinità marine. Ricerche mitologiche, iconografiche e stilistiche. Studi Miscelanei, 17. Roma: De Luca. ). However, the addition of a shell functioning as a fountain source dates to Roman era, as seen in the first known example, a relief from Ischia (Díez Platas, 1987Díez Platas, F. (1987). Catálogo e iconografía de las ninfas en la Hispania romana. Diss. Madrid: Universidad Complutense. and 2013, p. 62Díez Platas, F. (2013). “Agua de mármol: sobre las ninfas hispanorromanas”. In: F. Acuña, F. and Casal, R., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania VII. Homenaje al Prof. Dr. Alberto Balil. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, pp. 57-70.). Altogether, the shell motif associated with Venus and nymphs was highly popular in the Roman world, appearing in standing or crouching nymph fountain-figures (Leander-Touati, 2005, 13Leander-Tuoati, A. M. (2005). “The Piranesi Marbles from Rome to Stockholm, an introduction to research progress”. Opuscula Romana, 30, pp. 7-29.), clothed or completely naked (Ghedini, 1985Ghedini, F. (1985). “Sculture dal ninfeo e dal pretorio di Gortina”. Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene, 63, pp. 63-248. ; Baratta, 2013Baratta, G. (2013). “Reperti Scultorei da Tuficum (Borgo Tufico, Albacina) I”. Picus, XXXIII, pp.165-209.), following the diverse iconographic types. Their association to nymphaea made them a common feature in the decoration of stepped fountains, a small-sized water display found frequently in Roman houses, like an example on display in the Archaeological Museum of Altino (Galliazzo, 1979, lám. XVI, fig. 21Galliazo, V. (1979). “Il significato e funzione della fontanella a scalette d’acqua nella casa romana e un singolare frammento al Museo Civico di Feltre”. Atti della Accademia Roveretana degli Agiati, XIX, pp. 49-82.) and another in the Archaeological Museum of Sparta (Aristodemou, 2012, p. 120, n. 75Aristodemou, G. (2012). Sculptural Decoration of Monumental Nymphaea in the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire. Thessaloniki (in greek).). This nymph type also appears in various Pompeian mural paintings, as in the Casa delle Vestali, Casa dei Ceii, Casa di Romolo e Remo, Casa di Cecilio Iucundo or Casa di Salustio; in other wall decoration examples, they were depicted as sculptures, for example, in the Casa della Fontana dell’Amore, Casa della Venere in Bikini, Casa di Marco Lucrezio or also in the Stabian baths (Moorman, 1988, p. 44Moormann, E. M. (1988). La pittura parietale romana come fonte di conoscenza per la scultura antica. Assen-Maastricht: Van Gorcum.).

The most common sculptural scheme is the standing nymph, represented partially draped in a mantle slung around the hips, as the copy in study. However, they correspond to two different types depending upon the mantle and leg arrangement, those being the Venus Pudica and the Venus of Siracusa or Landolina (Ghedini, 1985Ghedini, F. (1985). “Sculture dal ninfeo e dal pretorio di Gortina”. Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene, 63, pp. 63-248. ; Aristodemou, 2012, pp. 119-120Aristodemou, G. (2012). Sculptural Decoration of Monumental Nymphaea in the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire. Thessaloniki (in greek).; Baratta, 2013Baratta, G. (2013). “Reperti Scultorei da Tuficum (Borgo Tufico, Albacina) I”. Picus, XXXIII, pp.165-209.). In the first case, the mantle appears wrapped around the hips and completely covering the legs, while it holds a large scallop shell (Ghedini, 1985Ghedini, F. (1985). “Sculture dal ninfeo e dal pretorio di Gortina”. Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene, 63, pp. 63-248. ); whereas, in the second type the legs are left uncovered, as in villa Salar’s figure. The Venus Pudica type was very common throughout the entire Roman Empire (Kapossy, 1969, pp. 12-13, figs. 1-2Kapossy, B. (1969). Brunnenfiguren der hellenistichen und römischen Zeit. Zürich: Juris. ; Baratta, 2013, p. 199Baratta, G. (2013). “Reperti Scultorei da Tuficum (Borgo Tufico, Albacina) I”. Picus, XXXIII, pp.165-209.) and a few copies have been documented in Hispania. Two slightly larger than life-sized statues were found in the province capital colonia Patricia Corduba, belonging perhaps to part of the theater’s decorative program (Loza, 1993, pp. 145-146, lám. 2Loza Azuaga, M. L. (1993). “Estatuas-fuentes romanas de Colonia Patricia Corduba”. Anales de Arqueología Cordobesa, 4, pp.141-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21071/aac.v0i.11381 ), together with another smaller sized copy, currently lost (Loza, 1993, p. 146Loza Azuaga, M. L. (1993). “Estatuas-fuentes romanas de Colonia Patricia Corduba”. Anales de Arqueología Cordobesa, 4, pp.141-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21071/aac.v0i.11381 ); also, there is a fragmentary figure from Tarraco (Tarragona) (Loza, 1992, pp. 327-329, n 63, láms. LX and LXILoza Azuaga, M. L. (1992). La decoración escultórica de fuentes en Hispania. Diss. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga. ; Díez Platas, 2013, p. 65Díez Platas, F. (2013). “Agua de mármol: sobre las ninfas hispanorromanas”. In: F. Acuña, F. and Casal, R., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania VII. Homenaje al Prof. Dr. Alberto Balil. Santiago de Compostela: Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, pp. 57-70.). As well as a copy in the Prado Museum, however the shell is a Modern Age addition and its provenance is foreign (Schröder, 2004, pp. 167-171, n. 18Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.); lastly, there is another example in the Alba collection (Loza and Beltrán, 2011, pp. 314-316, n. 13Loza Azuaga, M. L. and Beltrán Fortes, J. (2011). “Torso de Venus con concha”. In: Cacciotti, B., ed., El XIV duque de Alba coleccionista y mecenas de arte antiguo y moderno - Il XIV duca d’Alba collezionista e mecenate di arte antica e moderna. Madrid: CSIC, pp. 314-316.).

The second nymph type, like the villa Salar copy, derives from the Venus Landolina prototype (Ghedini, 1985Ghedini, F. (1985). “Sculture dal ninfeo e dal pretorio di Gortina”. Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene, 63, pp. 63-248. ). This model receives its name on account of a sculpture found in a nymphaeum at Syracuse, corroborating its original function as part of fountain decor (Becatti, 1971, pp. 27-28Becatti G. (1971). Ninfe e divinità marine. Ricerche mitologiche, iconografiche e stilistiche. Studi Miscelanei, 17. Roma: De Luca. ). In some cases, as when water flowed directly from the breasts, the shell was only an attribute, like the Bardo Museum example or another copy discovered in Marseille (Kapossy, 1969, p. 14Kapossy, B. (1969). Brunnenfiguren der hellenistichen und römischen Zeit. Zürich: Juris. ). Up until now, the only known replica in Roman Hispania was a fragmentary figure, missing the head, arms and part of the shell, from Tarraco (Tarragona). Presumably, it belonged to a domestic environment and formed part of the sculptural arrangement in a small nymphaeum; the rough finishing on its backside suggests that it was installed in a niche (Koppel, 1985, p. 119, n. 187, lam. 83, pp. 3-5Koppel, E. M. (1985). Die römischen Skulpturen von Tarraco. Berlin: de Gruyter. ).

Another sculpture fragment, discovered when cleaning the pool on the right side of the nymphaeum, corresponds to a third female statue (Fig. 7, C). It is modeled in fine-grained white marble and visibly similar to the stone of the first sculptures studied, as, at the moment, no analysis has been carried out. The measurements preserved are the following: height, 13 cm; width, 7,5 cm; thickness, 6,5 cm, which suggests that this figure was slightly larger than the other two sculptures discovered in the fountain. It shows part of the right arm and elbow, and, at least, the part preserved appears naked. Its partial state impedes identifying the character represented, as well as the sculptural type it would correspond to. However, it must have been part of the nymphaeum statuary decoration, most likely, a representation of a nymph, as the other two preserved sculptures. The arrangement of the fountain, which reproduces a grotto, reinforces this hypothesis and, therefore, the decorative program would have consisted of three sculptures, most probably nymphs.

The villa Salar nymphs most certainly adorned the nymphaeum in the 4^th century AD, although their exact arrangement is unknown. They could have simply been installed on the facade, displaying the variety of nymphs as fountain sources and decor. The aforementioned relief from Ischia, in the Hermitage collection and dated to the 1^st century AD (Piotrovsky, 2001, p. 142Piotrovsky, M. b. (2001). Treasures of Catherine the Great. London-New York: Thames & Hudson and Abrams.), offers a hypothetical sculptural arrangement. In the central part, a nymph or Venus is depicted pouring water from a scallop shell and flanked by two other nymphs, each supporting an overturned vessel on a pedestal from which water flows, creating a pendant, a sculptural display well-known in the Roman world (Bartman, 1988Bartman, E. (1988). “Decor and Pendants in Roman Sculptural Display”. American Journal of Archaeology, 92, pp. 211-225. and 1991, pp. 80-82Bartman, E. (1991). “Sculptural collecting and display in the private Realm”. In: Gazda, E. K., ed., New perspectives on the architecture and decor of the domus, villa, and insula. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 71-88.). Although this votive relief, which possibly represents an ideal statue arrangement in a nymphaeum, has no direct relation to the Salar pieces, it can be used as a proposal for their original sculptural arrangement. According to this, the nymph holding the shell would have stood in a central position flanked by two Pontia Euploia type nymphs, forming a pendant. This mode was followed in Hispania and can be found in similar fountain contexts near villa Salar, for example, in villa Bullas (Murcia), where various marble Erotes fountain-figures have been found (Loza and Noguera, 2018Loza Azuaga, M. L. and Noguera Celdrán, J. M. (2018). “Las estatuas-fuente de la villa romana de Los Cantos (Bullas, Murcia). informe preliminar”. In: Márquez, C. and Ojeda, D., eds., Escultura Romana en Hispania. VIII. Córdoba: UCO Press, pp. 253-278. ). According to this hypothetical arrangement, only one of the two nymph replicas has been recovered in villa Salar, that is, the figure holding a jug on its right side, which in the original scheme would have been positioned to the left of the main sculpture.

3. THE VENUS STATUE

As stated earlier, the access between the eastern ambulacrum and the peristyle had been monumentalized with two large columns sustaining a pediment. A diaeta decorated with a mosaic pavement added to the embellishment of this area of the open courtyard (Hidalgo, 2016, p. 192Hidalgo Prieto, R. (2016): “Arquitectura residencial y representativa”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 175-248.). In our opinion, various columns, smaller in size than the supports used in the ambulacra and re-used in a late Roman remodeling of this environment, could have been taken from a fountain display or pool located in the non-excavated central area of the courtyard. A perimeter canal coated with hydraulic mortar completed the additional architectural elements found in the peristyle. The western ambulacrum and the southwestern part of the interior courtyard have been completely excavated, revealing the presence of small semicircular fountains located at each central point of the perimeter canal. These fed water, on one hand, to the ambulacra (perhaps for occasional cleaning), and, on the other, towards the non-excavated central sector of the viridarium, where supposedly a fountain or pool is located, supplying it with water or even a cistern located beneath it. However, only future excavations can clarify these aspects. Whereas, the mosaic subject in the eastern ambulacrum corridor is a marine thiasos, the western gallery shows a unique hunting scene, a very popular theme among the late Roman villa elite, although examples in Baetica are rare in comparison to the more frequent geometric or mythological mosaics (López and Neira, 2020, pp. 157-158). While still not fully excavated, it shows three scenes of different animals being hunted, each one separated by a tree figure (Fig. 8). From north to south, the first scene shows a nobleman, dismounted from his horse, attacking a lioness with his sword, while another figure throws a stone at a lion. The second group depicts a hunter on foot with a dog harassing a boar, while another hunter on horseback is spearing a wild boar. In the last scene, a leopard is seen griping a horse with its claws and also reaching the rider, while another hunter is chasing an herbivore, perhaps a deer, as only its hind legs can be seen. This noteworthy mosaic has been dated to the 4^th century AD, although parts of it show repairs made most likely during the 5^th century AD (Román et al. in pressRomán Punzón, J. M., Moreno Alcaide, M., Ruiz Montes, P. and Fernández García, M. I. (in press). “La decoración musiva y escultórica en la villa romana de Salar (Granada). Recientes hallazgos”. In: Actas del Congreso Internacional Las villas romanas bajoimperiales de Hispania. Palencia, 15-17 noviembre, 2018.).

In 2018 a statue was discovered during the excavation of the western ambulacrum. The figure had been intentionally placed horizontal and face down on a level of brick and tegula fragments (Fig. 9, A-B) which has been dated between the second half of the 5^th century AD and the first half of the 6^th century AD (Fig. 10). Its preserved height is 74 cm and is carved in white marble, medium to fine- grained, coming from Pentelic quarries⁷According to the petrographic analysis result (vid, supra, footnote 3) Sample 19_VS_3 GE corresponds to a fine-grained calcic marble (MGS 1mm), with mosaic texture, curved and semi-curved contacts.. It presents some slight loss on the lower legs, hands and nose, also the right arm is in several fragments but joins also with the corresponding hand. It is a female figure representation, a nude Venus, modestly covering her pubis and left breast with her hands, posing with her body weight on the left leg and head turned toward the left. Bracelets are visible on both arms and the earlobes have been perforated. A support or, more likely, an attribute currently missing, would have reinforced the stability on the left side, also traces of a puntello can be seen on the right waist, which would have helped support this arm. The hair is arranged in a typical krobylos, rolled up on the crown and a bun at the nape of the neck, letting two thick locks fall over the shoulders and upper chest careless. This pose represents the goddess as she prepared for the bath, completely naked, following a model created by the famous sculpture Praxiteles, the Venus of Cnidus (for example, Lee, 2015, pp. 115-116Lee, M. M. (2015). “Other Ways of Seeing: Female Viewers the Knidian Aphrodite”. Helios, 42-1. pp. 103-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hel.2015.0006 ; Buell, 2016, pp. 4-8Buell, K. (2016). Aphrodite of Knidos, Trendsetter: Depictions of the Female Nude and Sexuality in Ancient Greek Sculpture. Portland State University, Honors Theses, 252. https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/honorstheses/252 (05/06/2020).; Olivieri, 2019, pp. 133-134Olivieri, F. (2019). “Venere del Mare: Testimonianze del culto nel Trapanese”. In: Blakely, S. and Collins, B. J., eds., Religious Convergence in the Ancient Mediterranean. Atlanta: Lockwood Press, pp. 127-148.).

Deriving from this model are two well-known representations of Venus Pudica, the Capitoline Venus and the Medici Venus, although both differ in the pose, head position, hairstyle and lateral support (Stewart, 2010Stewart, A. F. (2010). “A Tale of Seven Nudes: The Capitoline and Medici Aphrodites, Four Nymphs at Elean Herakleia, and an Aphrodite at Megalopolis”. Antichthon, 44, pp. 12-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0066477400002057 ; Barrow, 2018, pp. 37-38Barrow, R. J. (2018). Gender, identity and the body in Greek and Roman Sculpture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.). The villa Salar sculpture adds to the number of replicas, over a hundred in various sizes, currently known of the Capitoline type. Its origin varies according to the different authors, dating from around the turn of the 4^th century BC and early Hellenistic era (Stewart, 2010, pp. 24-25Stewart, A. F. (2010). “A Tale of Seven Nudes: The Capitoline and Medici Aphrodites, Four Nymphs at Elean Herakleia, and an Aphrodite at Megalopolis”. Antichthon, 44, pp. 12-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0066477400002057 ; Corso, 2014, pp. 123-125Corso, A. (2014). “Retrieving the style of Cephisodotus the Younger”. Arctos, 48, pp. 109-136.) up to the middle of the 2^nd century BC (Havelock, 1995, pp. 74-76Havelock, C. M. (1995). The Aphrodite of Knidos and her successors: A historical review of the Female Nude in the Greek Art. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. ). Hence, the attribute on the left side covered with a towel could have been a loutrophoros, or wedding vase, representing the nuptial bath (Schröder, 2004, pp. 145-153Schröder, S. F. (2004). Museo Nacional del Prado. Catálogo de la Escultura Clásica. II. Escultura mitológica. Madrid: Museo Nacional del Prado.) although, on occasions, it was replaced with a hydria, a dolphin - as in a sculpture from Illici (Elche) (Noguera, 2002Noguera Celdrán, J. M. (2002). “La Venus de Illici”. In: Littera scripta in honorem Prof. Lope Pascual Martínez. Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, vol. 2, pp. 759-776.) - or even with a tree stump. Bracelets appearing in Venus Cnidus replicas are also common in Capitoline Venus copies. Lastly, it possibly had earrings, as the ears appear pierced, a common feature in replicas manufactured in eastern Mediterranean workshops (Lee, 2015, 212-4Lee, M. M. (2015). “Other Ways of Seeing: Female Viewers the Knidian Aphrodite”. Helios, 42-1. pp. 103-122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/hel.2015.0006 ). However, following information gathered from Roman inscriptions, there was also a widespread tradition in Baetica to “embellish” female statues (Beltrán, 2009Beltrán Fortes, J. (2009). “Brillo y color de joyas en la estatuaria hispanorromana a través de las inscripciones”. In: Brinkmann, V. and Bendala, M., eds., El color de los dioses. El colorido de la estatuaria antigua. Madrid: Comunidad de Madrid, pp. 271-279. ). According to Havelock (1995, p. 75)Havelock, C. M. (1995). The Aphrodite of Knidos and her successors: A historical review of the Female Nude in the Greek Art. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. , oriental replicas are smaller in size than western productions, which would be consistent with the villa Salar figure. Stylistically it has been highlighted with a polished finish, along with the use of drill holes in the hairstyle, creating deep chiaroscuro contrasts. The eye and lip corners have also been enhanced using this technique. In our opinion, this statue was manufactured around mid-2^nd century AD, most likely, in a foreign workshop in consonance with the use of Pentelic marble.

In this case, it is not a fountain-statue, as it has no water source, but possibly fulfilled a decorative function in a water display situated perhaps in the western area of the peristyle where the perimeter channel widened into a small fountain, or in the water feature that, as argued before, must have decorated the center of the courtyard.

4. CONCLUSIONS

The sculptures would have been placed in selected areas of the villa, in “public” spaces within the private domain, created and decorated to impress the guests and highlight the wealth and social preeminence of the dominus, especially before his equals, the amici (Ellis, 1991Ellis, S. P. (1991). “Power, Architecture, and Decor: How the Late Roman Aristocrat Appeared to huis Guests”. In: Gazda, E. K., ed., New Perspectives on the Architecture and Decor of the Domus, Villa, and Insula. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, pp. 117-134.; Videbech, 2015, p. 460Videbech, C. (2015). “Private Collections of Sculpture in Late Antiquity: An overview of the Form, Function and Tradition”. In: Fejfer, J. and Moltensen, M., eds., Tradition. Transmission of Culture in the Ancient World. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, University of Copenhagen, pp. 451-480. ). In the 4^th century AD the visitors would have been toured through the central access on the western wing to impress them with the eastern wing entrance, decorated with a pediment supported by two large columns and paved with a magnificent hunting scene mosaic. They would have then reached the triclinium through the lateral ambulacra - mosaic pavements here are not known - or crossing through the center of the open courtyard, where the Capitoline Venus sculpture would have stood, as a well known statuary type, that can be added to the assemblage known in Baetica (Beltrán, 2004Beltrán Fortes, J. (2004). “Opera nobilia en la escultura romana de la Bética”. In: Nogales, T. and Gonçalves, L. J., eds., Actas de la IV Reunión sobre escultura Romana en Hispania. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura, pp. 17-33.). The statue and its models would have been recognized and admired by the amici, as the structure of the late Roman culture was characterized by its scholarly and literary knowledge (Beltran, 1995Beltrán Fortes, J. (1995). “La incorporación de los modelos griegos por las élites romanas. Una aproximación arqueológica”. In: Gascó, F. and Falque, E., eds., Graecia capta. De la conquista de Grecia a la helenización de Roma. Huelva: Universidad de Huelva, pp. 201-232. ), as well as its nostalgia for the pagan repertoire despite the new Christian ideology (for example, Weitzmann, 1979Weitzmann, K., ed. (1979). Age of Spirituality. Late Antique and Early Christian Art. Third to Seventh Century. New York: The Metropolitan Museum and Princeton University Press.). The eastern ambulacrum pavement displayed a marine thiasos theme presided by a nereid, highlighting the importance of water in this environment, which was fulfilled in the triclinium with the decisive presence of a nymphaeum, consisting of a niched fountain and perimeter canal. Here, there were at least two different iconographic types of nymph statues decorating the room, or the dominus could have possibly chosen to impress his visitors with a sculptural pendant, as argued before, where the nymph with the shell stood in the center and was flanked by representations of Pontia Euploia type nymphs with the position of the figure supports changed. It is also possible that both of the statues, dated to the 2nd century AD and manufactured in Pentelic marble, were part of a sculptural program consisting originally of imported pieces; and that this first program was completed, during the Severan period (as dated) or later in the 4th century AD (when placed in the nymphaeum), with another nymph sculpture, manufactured now in local Mijas marble. However, the scheme referred to in the Ischia relief and, especially, the context where the statues were found strongly points to the interpretation suggested above.

According to the mosaics and sculptures, as it is not possible to know if the rest of the decor - mural paintings and opera sectilia - had figurative scenes, the ornamental program should be dated to the 4^th century AD, and, therefore, all three sculptures are earlier. The figure of the nymph with a shell carved in Mijas (Málaga) marble would have been manufactured in a local workshop during the early Severan period. The other two sculptures are mid-2^nd century AD or scarcely later. Therefore, either the sculptural group belonged to the early villa or they were included during this last phase, acquired through what has been referred to as “antiquities trade” (Beltrán, 1995Beltrán Fortes, J. (1995). “La incorporación de los modelos griegos por las élites romanas. Una aproximación arqueológica”. In: Gascó, F. and Falque, E., eds., Graecia capta. De la conquista de Grecia a la helenización de Roma. Huelva: Universidad de Huelva, pp. 201-232. and 2007, p. 27Beltrán Fortes, J. (2007). “La función de la escultura en los programas decorativos de las villae romanas”. In: El Efebo de Antequera. Antequera: Proyectos Invehila, pp.17-29. ). Villa Salar is therefore an addition to the well-documented series of Baetica villae, together with the aforementioned villae of El Ruedo (Almedinilla, Córdoba) or La Estación and Caserío Silverio (Antequera, Málaga), that went through significant reforms during the 4^th century AD and - in many cases - were monumentalized, adding decorative programs based on mosaics, sculpture and, less preserved, mural paintings. All are part of a common cultural current that has recently been reviewed, especially the statuary decor (Rodríguez, Beltrán and Baena, 2016Rodríguez Oliva, P., Beltrán Fortes, J. and Baena del Alcázar, L. (2016). “La decoración escultórica”. In: Hidalgo, R., ed., Las villas romanas de la Bética. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, I, pp. 463-490.). Specifically, these figures from Salar highlight the significance water environments had in the villae of Baetica and how they were embellished with sculptural programs that included fountain-statues and other appropriate representations, such as the Capitoline Venus or the bathing Aphrodite.