WAMPUM AND SHELL ARTICLES 447 
When Le Moyne spoke at Onondaga in 1654, two parts of his 
a9 
first word were “ 100 little tubes or cylinders of red glass, which 
b 
are the diamonds of the country,” and a great collar of porcelain. 
The 15th present was of these glass tubes. In this he makes these 
beads equal in value to wampum, but they were rarely used on 
public occasions. Frontenac, however, gave the Iroquois some 
packages of glass beads in 1682. They were his fifth word for some 
Onondaga women. The English also presented the Onondagas 
with 30 strings of white glass beads in 1687, and 75 similar strings 
were used in a preceding conference. One Canadian belt, fig. 178, 
is of glass beads, but this is exceptional, though others might be 
named. Wampum had an official character belonging to nothing 
else. 
Condolence 
The ceremony of condolence, now including the raising of a new 
chief, is one of the most interesting of surviving Iroquois customs. 
A similar ceremony was found among most Canadian tribes, involv- 
ing the idea of a resurrection of the dead chief in the person of the 
new. In some nations the change was complete. The new chief 
abandoned his old name and took that of the deceased, assuming 
his family relations and duties. His old clothes were removed and 
new garments were given him. Among the Iroquois the change 
_was less complete. The principal chiefs had official names, and the 
new chief took that of the dead without necessarily losing his per- 
sonal name, a practice much like our own. At an early day the 
condolence for a dead Iroquois chief did not usually include the 
raising of the new one, which made a separate affair. Almost all 
councils were opened with a general condolence, but there were 
special ones for this purpose alone. ‘The earliest one of which we 
have any particular account among the New York Iroquois is that 
given by Pierron, after the battle between the Mohawks and Mahi- 
kans in 1669. It has been mistaken for something like the Huron 
feast of the dead, of which we have no historic trace in New York. 
Unfortunately the missionary made needless trouble about what he 
saw, and withdrew without seeing all. The story will be found in 
the Relation of 1670. Enough will be quoted to show its connec- 
