If you have the 1932 Hungerford book by Phelps on page 34
he writes about Mary Graves:
"Mary, probaly married Thomas Hungerford (2nd). Mr. Parker, author of the 'History of East Haddam', says that: There was a Graves family in New London, but no Grey or Gray.Thomas Hungerford's wife was Mary Graves, sister of Benjamin Graves who married Mary Hoar."
He goes on to say: "I find the following paragraph in a letter from Mr. Warde Hungerford": "I came to the conclusion myself that the wife of Thomas Hungerford, of East Haddam, was Mary Graves.Not Gray, or Grey.In the first place there was a Graves family in New London, but no Gray or Grey family."
From the book "Soldiers in King Phillip's WAr" by Bodge, we find that Thomas Hungerford is listed #140 on a list of English volunteers in the Narraganset War (page 444), then we find on page 446 in the list of volunteers who drew "Cedar Swamp" lots #163 being Thomas Hungerford.
What does this mean?
Narraganset was "Greene" country.Thomas didn't have to be only in New London to look for a wife.
Now lets look at page 4 of Phelps where he states:
"Thomas Hungerford 2nd, son of Thomas 1st, married before June 6, 1671, Mary Gray of Narragansett, R.I.All that I have had communication with, Orville Hungerford of Watertown, N.Y., and Robert E. Day of Hartford, lately deceased, and Henry Hungerford Drake of West Winsted, Conn. agree on Mary Gray.
If you have any further data we would like to get it.The proof of that marriage at that time whether Gray or Greene is from the following record:
"New London County Court, June 6, 1671.Thomas Hungerford and Mary his wife being presented to this court for committing fornication before marriage this court considering the case circum (word not clear W.H.) doe adjudge that the said Hungerford and his wife to pay within one month five pounds to the treasury of this county or in defect there of to receive corporal punishment". "The (word left out W. H.) hath accepted a barrel of pork for this fine by Pd by Mr Palines to George Tongue on Counties account".
"As Thomas Hungerford 3rd was the first meantioned in his will it is fair to presume he was the child born of this fornication".
He further states: "Here this letter abruptly ends unsigned, but it is evidently from Austin N. Hungerford.
Further down on page 4, Phelps goes on to say:
"He moved with his father to New London in 1650 and lived there until about 1687.He married before June 6, 1671, Mary Green or Gary of the PLantation of the Narragansetts in Rhode Island; and secondly Mary Graves, daughter of John, b. in England, and sister of Benjamin, who married Mary Hoar".
He cleary confuses the issue here :-)
Mary Gray's father, Edward Gray is said to have owned the Narragansett Club (whatever that was)
This point only shows that Thomas Hungerford and Mary Gray could have been in the same place at the same time.
Their ages were correct for marrying with Mary Gray being about five years younger then Thomas Hungerford.Thomas being born about 1648 and thus was about 23 in 1671, and Mary Gray, born in 1653 was about 18 years old.
As I have before stated: "I rule out the Mary Greene born in 1633 identified by Elizabeth M. Leach Rixford in her book "Three Hundren Colonial Ancestors and War Service.
So what do we have?
King Phillip's War pretty much ended in the Narragansett Fort Fight December 19th, 1675.The draw for the Cedar lots was some time later.
So if we have Thomas Hungerford 2nd married by June 6, 1671
(the day of their court case where they are called Thomas Hungerford and wife) it doesn't rule out being married to Mary Gray being his wife but I'm not leaning that way.
At first I always thought that there were many reasons why a child may not be listed in her father's will as with Mary Gray other then being dead at the time.That basically is the theory put forth by the Mayflower Society that she never
married nor had children as she was not mentioned in her father's will.
Could it be possible that her Puritan father took her out of his will after the public charge of "fornication before marriage" as shown above.
I suggest that is a possibility, however, if Mary Gray was not of New London, then how would the people & Court know they were not married when Mary became with child.
Remember there was no Gray / Grey families in New London.
But there was a Mary Graves, daughter of John Graves, however !!!!
When we look at John Graves family we find in NEHGS Vol 35, page 246 the following:
" John Graves arrived in the 3rd month 1633.He brought 5 children; John, Samuel, Jonathan, Sarah and Mary.His wife quickly died & he married Judith a maid servant, by whom his first child Hanah was borne about the end of the seventh month 1636."
Judith is thought to be Judith Allward.THey married in December 1635.
Anyway, this puts Mary Graves about 15 years older then our Thomas Hungerford 2nd, as was Mary Greene selected by Elizabeth Rixford.
Not probable then, as it would most likel be now.
So where are we ?
Back with our Mary Gray.
She was the right age.
There was probable opportunity to meet.
And the fornication charge may well have caused her father to not mention her in his will.
One would think that if Thomas Hungerford had married a descendent of the Mayflower arrivals, it would be better recorded, even if she was disowned by her father for the events.
However, based on age I place Mary Gray, the daughter of Edward Gray and Mary Winslow as the "most probable" wife of Thomas Hungerford.
That does not rule out the possibility that his wife was another "Mary Greene", and thus the son named "Green Hungerford".
I hope I have not unduly confused you with my logic :-)
Lyle R. (Andy) Anderson