>It is well known and accepted that simple steam engines -- mostly used
>for toys to amuse the wealthy -- existed under the Roman Empire from
>the early centuries of the Christian era.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_of_Alexandria
>
>Nevertheless, fifteen hundred years were to pass before the steam
>engine became the force that propelled England and the rest of Europe
>into the Industrial Revolution. Why the enormous lapse of time before
>the full potential of steam power was exploited? While a number of
>critical inventions were made that proved useful in the development of
>steam power -- in particular, cast iron, itself derived from the coke
>produced in blast furnaces -- in the intervening millenium and a half,
>were these really beyond the power and conception of the Roman mind?
>
>What if the Romans had seen the full potential of steam power? Would
>their empire still have fallen? What affects would such technological
>developments have had on the form and extent of the empire? On
>government. On the economy. On the military. On religion. On
>Christianity.
>
>In particular, why didn't the Romans develop steam power? What,
>exactly was the obstacle, or obstacles? Were they technological,
>social, economic, religious?