The name “Imperial Fora” refers to the five monumental complexes commissioned by the emperors and built in topographical continuity with the Roman Forum of the regal and
republican period, replacing it in its religious, political and administrative role.
In chronological order of inauguration they are: the Forum of Caesar (46 BC), the Forum of Augustus (2 BC), the Temple of Peace (AD 75), the Forum of Nerva, or
Forum Transitorium (AD 97), and the Forum of Trajan (AD 112 and 113); at the same time as the latter, the restored Forum of Caesar was inaugurated again and the
complex of buildings known today as “Trajan’s Markets” was built.
The forum complexes, built with the enormous wealth accumulated in wars, served to celebrate and represent the patrons who commissioned them, who through their rule
guaranteed peace in Rome.
To lay them out, the terrain was reshaped and inhabited areas and public buildings, including sacred ones, were sacrificed. Significantly, the inscription carved on the base of
Trajan’s Column states that its purpose was to show how high the hill (mons) levelled for the construction of the forum of the same name had been. Each complex was designed in a conceptual
and physical relationship with the earlier ones, and communicated with them through openings on its various sides.
From an urban-planning and architectural point of view, the Fora are monumental squares with porticoes and exedrae, laid out on a central axis; quadrangular in shape, they vary
in size and orientation according to the available space and, in part, to pre-existing structures; the far side was emphasised by the temple dedicated to the deity
protecting the emperor, whose presence was repeatedly evoked by depictions of him on horseback or in a quadriga, by inscriptions bearing his name and by the symbolic references
of the iconography and decorative motifs.
The legal and administrative function was carried out in the civil basilicas, while the cultural dimension was provided by the libraries and the statue galleries.
The architectural scheme, made monumental by its grand dimensions and by its rich decorative and sculptural programme in precious coloured marbles, became a model to be exported
and reproduced in the Roman provinces.
Several “itineraries” intertwine along the route; indeed, the Museum’s project must necessarily also be a communication project: the architecture of the Fora within the
architecture of the Markets, the history of the city within the history of one of its “districts”.