From the moment Rockstar announced Red Dead Redemption 2 was a prequel, many had questions. Some of these were answered throughout the game, but many lingered on. Some were simple: why wasn't Arthur Morgan ever mentioned in RDR1 is answered with a simple because he didn't actually exist at the time. Some of RDR1-RDR2 inconsistencies can be chalked up to this, but others are headscratchers.

For example, family is important in both Red Dead games. Marston is aiming to defend his family and set them free from his past in the first game, while the family unit of the Dutch Van Der Linde Gang slowly falls apart. Because of this, Jack Marston's future in Red Dead 3 or otherwise will likely repeat these generational curses, yet he's not the only child of John Marston. Throughout the first game, he frequently refers to a daughter, but during the time she likely would have existed in-game, she simply doesn't.

RELATED: Red Dead 2 Fan Notices Interesting Detail About How John and Arthur Aim

Everything We Know About John Marston's Daughter

Red Dead Cover John Marston

By the time of Red Dead 1, John Marston's daughter has passed on. She's never seen or even named in-game, nor can any grave be found, with fans simply knowing that she is younger than Jack. The latter part is the most interesting due to the sheer number of graves related to John Marston's family. John and Abigail are both buried on the hill where John met Red Dead Redemption's Strange Man, but his daughter's is nowhere to be found. The only way fans know she exists is due to a series of quests she is mentioned in:

  • Bonnie Macfarlane's Women and Cattle
  • Nigel West Dickens' The Sports of Kings and Liars
  • Luisa Fortuna's Father Abraham
  • Javier Escuella's The Gats of El Presidio

Not much can be gathered from the dialogue except for one key fact: she died years after John's time in the gang. Due to the first game's setting and frame within the greater story, when this exactly is becomes hard to pin down. Still, come Red Dead Redemption 2, this time period is explored. It's the perfect opportunity to name her, at least mention her, explain some of this, or anything along those lines. Instead, she's not mentioned whatsoever in Red Dead Redemption 2. On the one hand, this makes sense because she wouldn't have existed in the majority of the story, but as time passes and she may have, she goes unmentioned.

John Marston's Daughter Doesn't Effectively Exist

John and Abigail in front of their house

As many know, there are several key years in which the game takes place. Arthur Morgan's story in Red Dead Redemption 2 takes place in 1899, John Marston's Red Dead 2 story takes place in 1907, John Marston's main Red Dead 1 story takes place in 1911, and Jack Marston's story takes place at the end of Red Dead 1 in 1914. These dates can easily be ruled out by when it would be impossible for her to be born, meaning the entirety of Red Dead 1 and the events of the main game in 1899.

RELATED: Red Dead 2 Player Notices Neat Detail About Arthur Riding Horses

When playing as John in Red Dead 2, 8 years have passed. From 1899 to 1911 is an even wider 12 year period. With exploring John in Red Dead 2, it would have made a ton of sense to explain what happened to her: an unmarked grave lost to time, a stillbirth or traumatic event, or the like. The only real thing that could be drawn from this time period is that she didn't die in some major event, and that she could not have been too old. The very fact that she is not named by Marston at any point would seemingly suggest she was never named, and with this in mind, there's a few reasons she may not have ever been touched on or explained. After all, it begs the question: if she bears little-to-no impact in the story, why does Marston constantly refer to her?

Red Dead 2: John Marston's Daughter Speculation

First off, there's another possibility: she could have been born between 1907 and 1911. This makes the most sense, as while it's a short time window, it would explain why she's never mentioned in Red Dead 2 but is in Red Dead 1. This would also still fit in the "years" after John left the gang and would also make her substantially younger than Jack. Ultimately, this makes the most sense and would explain most of this, except for two key points: why is she never named/have no grave, and what's the purpose of this character existing if only in reference.

For the first question, it's likely leaning on the realism of the Red Dead franchise. There's no doubt that the mortality rate during these times was much higher than today, and infant mortality rates were probably quite high. As such, it could be that she died shortly after birth and before her parents could named her. It's possible she was named but passed early in her life, making it a painful memory for Marston. That doesn't really explain why she doesn't have a grave; even an infant would have likely been buried in one. Especially if she was indeed born between 1907 and 1911, the grave would still have been rather prominent come the first game. If it were a stillbirth, it may have been an unmarked grave, but that's also impossible to determine.

Ultimately, it seems that Marston's daughter is a story-telling device for him. Not that it's really needed, but the Wild, Wild West is a hard place to survive, thrive, and raise a family. Daughters in storytelling often have a way of "softening" their fathers, and it could be that the added hardship was dumped on Marston to develop his character in the first game. His daughter wasn't alive to soften him, highlighting how his rogue-ish abilities and ways with a gun weren't lost in the years since he left the Dutch Van Der Linde gang.

At the same time, this is a lot of speculation with very little to go on. It's entirely possible that was originally born sooner and time has just passed; after all, somehow, Javier Escuella knew he had "children." It's possible she was more or less retconned, so that it wouldn't need to be explained. It could be that it was all sudden one year and that's it; it could be that she wouldn't have done more than just hurt John to show a pregnant Abigail or have all of this going on. Since John and Abigail do get married at the end of Red Dead 2, perhaps the child was conceived that night.

All things considered, there's really not enough to understand the purpose of Marston's daughter, it seems she may have basically been retconned, and it's unlikely that such small, forgettable references and a hard-to-pinpoint-accurately timespan will matter in the future.

Red Dead Redemption 2 is available now for PC, PS4, Stadia, and Xbox One.

MORE: Hidden Red Dead Redemption 2 Detail Shows Dutch Really Cares About Arthur