Which is the “real” Merrill coat of arms?

Deane Merrill, dwmerrill@charter.net
January 2010

Except for families which were verifiably of nobility (the Merrill family was not), I am highly skeptical of any claims to an authentic coat of arms.  That is the message of my blog “Merrill Coat of Arms.”

 I think Samuel Merrill, the author of A Merrill Memorial, would have agreed.   Heraldry is often invented by persons wishing to impress others, or by hucksters trying to make a buck.  A coat of arms is a pretty thing to hang over your fireplace or put on your stationery, but don't trust its authenticity.

We know of at least six unrelated Merrill families - unrelated means that the common ancestor was earlier - sometimes much earlier - than the time (around 1400) when a few unrelated people adopted the Merrill surname.  The fact that they chose the same name is pure coincidence.

DNA research has overturned a belief of traditional genealogists - that all people of the same surname must be related.   It's true that all humans are related, but so far back that surnames are irrelevant.  It took me quite a while to get used to this idea.

I believe that the merle (blackbird) connection with the Merrill family is a myth, based only the similarity of the two words.

Even if you trust the authenticity of the crests in A Merrill Memorial (which I don't), there is no way of knowing which Merrill family used any crest, unless you can associate that crest with a proven ancestor.

But the crests do look pretty.

Back to Merrill coat of arms

\\wd250gb\dwmerrill\family2\real_coatofarms.docx, htm (Web page, filtered) 1/16/2010
http://merrill.olm.net/family/real_coatofarms.htm