Ever since Alexander had first encountered them as he conquered the Persian Empire, elephants had been a fashionable element in all Hellenistic armies when they could be obtained. Despite some serious drawbacks, they were widely seen as a very useful weapon, particularly when facing an enemy unused to them, and with their connections to India, the Seleucid Army always had a particularly strong elephant arm, at least until they lost that link in the second century BCE. At the Battle of Raphia, in 217 BCE, during the Fourth Syrian War, they fielded 102 of these beasts, but they were not alone. The Ptolemaic Army they faced could also deploy elephants, and at Raphia there were 73 of them. However, with no access to India, the Ptolemies had to source their elephants from what is today Eritrea and Somalia, and these were African Forest elephants, noticeably smaller and less aggressive than the Indian species. The classic elephant tactic of the day was to place them in front of the main army and then let them charge the enemy, but Raphia was a particularly large battle, so with insufficient elephants to cover the whole line, both sides lined them up in front of their wings, where the opposing cavalry was also formed up (horses generally being frightened of elephants). The Seleucid elephants charged, and quickly overwhelmed their smaller African rivals, causing the desired collapse of the Ptolemaic left wing, although in the end this success was not exploited and the Ptolemaic Army won the day.

While the set name mentions Raphia, elephants were used throughout the period, and in this set we get quite a lot of them. Our top row begins with a Ptolemaic elephant, which stands at about 30 mm at the shoulder, which is 2.16 metres to scale, and since this species grows to a maximum of 2.5 metres, this is a fair size. The animal looks to be correctly proportioned, with the proper, fairly small rounded ears, but the African Forest has quite short tusks that are straight and point downward, yet those on this animal are clearly very curved and point upward. Being a smaller animal, this elephant has a smaller tower, which is sufficient for two crew before getting very crowded. The method of construction and attachment looks good here, as does the simple caparison it wears.

The rest of the elephants are all labelled as Seleucid, and so are of the Indian species. This can grow to as much as 2.9 metres, but the ones here are a perfectly respectable 35 mm (2.52 metres) at the shoulder, so large enough to clearly dominate the Ptolemaic animals. Here the tusks are good, but for some reason all have been given rather triangular ears – something which we could find no evidence for in nature. Each carries a somewhat larger tower in three different designs, all of which seem reasonable. They have two shields on each side, suggesting a crew of four, though that would be something of a squeeze. These animals also have caparisons, some of which look to be padded or even with leather or metal scale armour (pointing upward to deflect expected blows from below). They all also have a magnificent piece of plate armour on the head, richly adorned with a decorative crest. In addition, all three have apparent armour rings round the legs, presumably to avoid being hamstrung, so are very well protected. In fact, the second and third of these animals are the same in body, having only a different tower and head. Apart from the ears then, all these creatures look the part and make for some very impressive models.

Despite the geographical location of these two empires, both the Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms were still heavily influenced by their Macedonian/Hellenic roots, and the appearance of troops on both sides was little different, so the various figures supplied in this set could equally serve in either army. All these figures are in very typical clothing and armour for the period. Those with armour have a cuirass in the Greek linothorax style, some apparently being of stiffened linen, and some looking like scale armour. There is debate as to how common metal scale armour was in the late 3rd century, apart from officers, but here it is fairly common. The evidence suggests this became more common in the second century, after further exposure to the Romans, but may also be appropriate for as early as Raphia. The helmets on show here are of two styles – either Phrygian or Attic-Thracian – and both are reasonable. However we were a little surprised that all of the armoured tower crew also wear greaves, which seems unnecessary when you are standing in a wooden construction that largely protects your whole lower body. Perhaps greaves were a mark of a front-rank warrior, and so a status symbol worth wearing even if not strictly useful, or perhaps they were worn in case the soldier had to disembark and continue the fight on foot? We do not know, and there is no information on the dress of elephant crews specifically, but it is an interesting point. The tower crew consist of one archer and one officer with a sword, but the rest carry the sarissa, a long pike with which they could reach an opponent either on the ground or mounted on a horse or elephant. The design of those in this set is good, and they are mostly 68 mm in length – plenty long enough to reach their enemy, although the last man in our first row of figures has a shorter example. We were surprised, however, to note that apart from the officer and one other man, none of the tower crew carry a sword as a sidearm.

Most of the mahouts (the drivers sitting on the neck of the elephant) are unarmoured, and just wear a tunic. This would seem strange as they would be an obvious target for opposing infantry, especially archers, but they are always portrayed this way in the few ancient sources we have. Logic strongly suggests this is not how they appeared in battle, and the sources show them in more peaceful times, but of course as usual there is no definitive proof of this. Each holds an ankush, a short goad with a hook, with which they controlled their animal. Two also hold a shield, which would seem like a sensible precaution in the same way as armour would seem necessary, but strangely both hold this on their right arm, and their ankush with their left hand – we don’t know why.

That leaves just one more figure, the last pictured man, who is fleeing whilst being attacked by one of the elephants. Wearing just a simple tunic, and with no weapon, he could be any type of light infantry, such as always accompanied elephants into battle, or even some unfortunate civilian. This is a nice extra touch, and one we have come to expect from Linear-A.

The general comments on the sculpting are all positive. These 3D printed figures, elephants included, are all printed complete as seen above, with no assembly at all, and look fantastic. Lovely, energetic poses with no need for compromise, perfect proportions, and great detail. All the tower crew have pegs on their feet which can fit into holes in the tower floor, although of course you can please yourself as to which figure is placed where should you choose, and the mahouts also fit into a hole in the elephant’s neck using the large peg as seen. Since one of the elephants has no room for such a mahout, you have some extra choice here, which is great. The poses are all really nice, and include an apparently dead figure slumped over the edge of his tower, and a mahout in a similar condition.

So far, so good, but the news is not all good. Doubtless you will have noticed the last figure in our first row of figures has a very serious defect – his chest is basically just a large cavity and he has clearly been misprinted. Doubtless such things happen, and we must assume most examples of this figure are properly done, but Linear-A do seem to have real issues with their quality control, and including obviously defective figures like this in any box is disappointing. Therefore we must say the copy of the set you buy may have similar, or different defects. One problem with the sculpting which is clearly deliberate is that the inside of all the towers is smooth and lacks detail, which is a shame, and the bow of the archer has a very thick bowstring, which we think would have been better omitted entirely if a realistic string is not possible in this material. So there is some room for improvement, particularly in checking product before despatch, but in general these are good-looking miniatures.

Throughout the Hellenistic period, elephants often played a central role in the outcome of battles, though sometimes not what their commander might have wished, so a set like this is a major component for many such armies of the period. While the subject has been covered before, this is a commendable set in terms of the sheer number of animals and figures on offer, and the variety of the appearance, as well as the general quality of the sculpting. The presence of these creatures is as dramatic on the tabletop as it was on the battlefields of the ancient world, and we felt that, despite some niggles, these figures convey that sense of awe rather well.