The ‘Wicked Bible’ of 1631 is a fascinating and rare book, made popular and amusing in modern times through its omission of the word ‘not’ from the seventh commandment, rendering it “Thou shalt commit adultery.” (Exodus 20:14) However, the book is the subject of several historical misconceptions which overstate the harshness of the early seventeenth- century authorities towards both it and the printers responsible, giving the impression that the reaction was sulphurous religious outrage. There has been remarkably little historical work done on the edition. This dissertation seeks to remedy this in part by gaining insight into the emotional reactions of people at the time to the seemingly blasphemous misprint. Adultery, despite the social opprobrium it could generate, was a common topic of humour in the Early Modern period. Through analysis of popular comedic entertainment of the time, and engagement with scholarship on the roots and causes of humour in the period, this dissertation argues that the Wicked Bible would have been found funny then, just as it is today. Although the authorities expressed anger at the errors and poor quality of the edition, their words and actions suggest a greater focus on worldly prestige and economic competitiveness than spiritual danger. Through examination of court records and other primary source texts, it is shown that the authorities were more embarrassed than enraged. Their punishment of the printers was in reality more lenient than has often been stated, and shows that even when dealing with a threat to their image and authority, the authorities were able to find ways to advance their own agendas. Analysis of the Wicked Bible shows that early modern belief and emotion contained more nuance and variety than is often credited in popular understanding today, and demonstrates the power of books to uncover historical emotion.