Focus on this artwork and explain the Polemics.
The identification of La Reana with the Fontes Tamarici has been contested to the point that, as of 2023, it is highly doubtful that they have anything to do with those described by Pliny. 
Fernández Acebo, after a critical study of both classic and historiographical sources, concludes that the adscription of La Reana to the Plinian fountain is wrong, arising from a faulty interpretation of the classical sources (Ptolemy, Strabo and Pomponius Mela) by the historian Enrique Flórez in the XVIII century.
Flórez, with the very limited material available at his time, confused two ancient polities, the Camarici and the Tamarici. Wrong identification of tribes led to wrong identification of places. This error was stablished as a fact without further examination, backed by Florez's reputation, until the end of the XX century. 
Under this false assumption, archaeologist García Bellido identified the Reana as the Plinian springs. This identification was soon followed by its declaration as historical monument ("Monumento Histórico") by the Ministry of National Education, eager to add some kind of touristic attraction to the zone. Much to the dismay of Bellido, the archaeological campaigns on site (1960-1961) yield practically no roman findings, but medieval ones, a fact which Bellido candidly acknowledges:"The result of both (digging) campaigns results in an insufficient documentation of roman presence in the spring". 
The official declaration of historical monument was a no return point for Bellido, a honest and hardworking archaeologist, which left the matter as it was, not to contradict the Francoist authorities nor disenchant the locals with a retraction. 
Fernández Acebo proposes that probabilities are high that real Fontes Tamarici might be the impressive intermittent river of La Fuentona ("The big Fountain") in Ruente, Cantabria (Spain) which fits neatly with Plinian description.
springs Enrique Flórez Ruente Spain Cantabri Cantabria Fontes Tamarici