Guys, before saying this, I would like to state that in the company of most of you gentlemen, I know next to nothing about keris. I'm an intellectual dwarf on the matter. My knowledge is so small that it gathers at the feet of your knowledge, together with other small knowledges, just to bow down in the dust and WORSHIP! I realize that a lot of you have been collecting for half a lifetime – more in some instances – and that you possess a quality of knowledge that only comes with submersion in a topic for years on end. I have nothing but the utmost respect for all of you!
When it comes to ivory, it is likewise important to me to state that my knowledge on the subject doesn't come from arms collecting, but as a consequence of my job. As I have said before, I put bread on our table as a CITES Management Authority for our Nature Agency under The Danish Environmental Ministry and am now going on my 6th year. In other words: It's part of my daily work to look at random peoples' old stuff, make a source species ID and tell the owners if they need to apply for a CITES-permit/certificate before selling the item in question. I also work borders with our customs agency, ID'ing items coming in through the mail as well as carried by travellers in the airport.
By this time, I would estimate the amount of items from CITES-contained species that have passed through my hands, to number in the low thousands -conservatively set. When giving my opinion on a source species, the requirements of my position and the possible legal gravity that my judgement potentially carries, has cultivated in me a strong sense of carefulness: I might need, to later stand up in court and reiterate my opinion on the source of a given material in front of a judge. For that reason, I will ever only state that a material
is from a certain species, if I with every fibre of my being consider it so. Any doubt at all, and I let it go.
A perspective which becomes apparent with sufficient time spent in this field, is that the guidelines for identification of ivories are exactly that: Guidelines! The more pieces you see, the more you become aware of the existence of anomalies and how completely far and strangely removed from the norm these often are. When you not only look at weapon hilts, but everything, from raw tusks and teeth, in longitudinal- and transsection, to tiny little jewelry and scrap ivory, it becomes very clear: A strong ID is
not as easy as ticking of a certain box and then you have your species.
This was the point of my first post:
To encourage other collectors to likewise be cautious and base their assessments on careful consideration of the whole piece presented, rather than quickly looking for a single character fit.
Regarding the piece at hand, my opinion is still, from the photographic material here presented, that the source might as well be some other kind of ivory than hippo. If I failed to make it clear in my first post, please let me explain here, that I mentioned walrus not because I found it a likely source in this case. I mentioned having seen similar “dots in a row” in walrus ivory (likewise with elephant) – none of which have an interstitial zone as part of their physiological structure. I mentioned this, merely to support my point that basing a species ID on a single character in a given piece of ivory, is a fallacy.
My thoughts on topic of hippo ivory in the context at hand, are much in alignment with Allan Maisley's. Like Allan, I would also very much like to see written proof that hippo ivory was carved and used in this way in South East Asia. Please note, that I don't say that I do not believe it, simply that I would like to see the source. In the face of new evidence, I am always up for changing my opinion!
Secondly, and for me more importantly, I would like a source to “dots in a row” being a sure-shot character for the ID of hippo ivory. Willem, my Borneo-guru, you belong right up there in the group of gentlemen that I first mentioned, but I humbly believe you to be wrong on this matter. I know Espinosa & Mann, very –
very - well, but nowhere do I remember them making a reference to these “dots in a row”.
I would like to check it out now myself, but hey, it's New Years and I have an impatient girlfriend, actually waiting around for
me this time.. Therefore, in the words of some Roman:
Nunc est bibendum! 
Happy New Years guys, - Thor