Prominence Upon its publication, Dale Morgan called Brodie's first book the "finest job of scholarship yet done in
Mormon history and perhaps the outstanding biography in several years—a book distinguished in the range and originality of its research, the informed and searching objectivity of its viewpoint, the richness and suppleness of its prose, and its narrative power." For decades afterward,
No Man Knows My History enjoyed broad acceptance. In 1971, Latter-day Saint historian
Marvin S. Hill observed that at the time, "most professional American historians" regarded the book "as the standard work on the life of Joseph Smith." By 1995, although four other book-length studies of Joseph Smith had been produced, none achieved as much prominence as
No Man Knows My History. In 1995, Utah State University sponsored a symposium to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the publication of
No Man Knows My History during which scholars reflected on the book's contributions to Mormon studies. In his 2005 biography of Smith titled
Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling,
Richard Bushman noted that at that time Brodie's "biography was acknowledged by non-Mormon scholars as the premier study of Joseph Smith," and he called Brodie "the most eminent of Joseph Smith's unbelieving biographers." In 2007, Bushman observed Knopf still sold about a thousand copies of
No Man Knows My History annually and noted Brodie had "shaped the view of the Prophet for half a century. Nothing we have written has challenged her domination. I had hoped my book would displace hers, but at best it will only be a contender in the ring, whereas before she reigned unchallenged." However, historian Laurie Maffly-Kipp, who is not Mormon, believed the influence of
No Man Knows My History was waning, as while it had been "the 'go to' book on Smith's life" for "most historians",
Rough Stone Rolling displaced it as a "definitive account" of Smith.
Criticism Upon its 1945 release, one of the book's earliest critics was
Vardis Fisher, a prolific novelist and former Latter-day Saint. Fisher also criticized Brodie's willingness to "give the content of a mind or to explain motives which at best can only be surmised," making
No Man Knows My History "almost more a novel than a biography." Although Brodie's literary style invited readers to identify with people portrayed in the book, critics said it relied on guesswork and sometimes outright invention of what someone may have been thinking or feeling.
D. Michael Quinn assessed
No Man Knows My History as "deeply flawed in its research, in its unrelenting distaste for Joseph Smith, and in its interpretative framework," but went on to write that Brodie "demonstrated [Smith's] complex personality, identified crucial issues, asked significant questions, gave previously unavailable information, and wrote with stellar prose." Frank Henry Hyde's recorded date of birth precludes Smith's paternity, and whether or not Smith fathered Orson Washington Hyde has neither been proved nor disproved.
Influence The significance and ground-breaking nature of Brodie's work is generally acknowledged within
Mormon studies, and
No Man Knows My History influenced the field in several lasting ways. Brodie also rejected earlier academic hypotheses that Smith was epileptic or paranoid and instead depicted Smith as rational and thoughtful. The interpretation of Smith as possessing all his faculties spread and persisted in scholarly studies of Mormonism.
No Man Knows My History also contributed to the development of a more open-minded approach to church history among Mormon scholars. Historian Marvin S. Hill urged future scholars to avoid extremes in studies of Joseph Smith and instead find a middle ground between hagiography and cynicism. In 1998, non-Mormon
Dan Vogel agreed with Brodie that Smith deceived others but posited him as a "pious deceiver" who lied in order to impel people toward repentance and faith in God. In his 2005 book
Rough Stone Rolling, historian Richard Bushman, a Mormon, sought to challenge the popularity of
No Man Knows My History by studying Smith's cultural context and sympathetically understanding him as an accomplished but contradictory person. In 2014, religious studies scholar
Ann Taves, who is not Mormon, proposed a naturalistic model of Smith that nevertheless rejected the idea of fraudulence, instead interpreting Smith as a "skilled perceiver" who, with the assistance of other believers, manifested a new religious reality they mutually and sincerely believed in. In 2020, William L. Davis similarly posed a naturalistic model while still interpreting Smith as sincerely religious without deception. In 2019, an opinion essay published in
Theological Librarianship assessed that "contemporary scholars have found multiple flaws in Brodie's methodology and conclusions, so her work has fallen out of fashion considerably, but its impact on the field cannot be overstated". ==Mormon responses==