Was there really a curse of Tutankhamun?
No — the curse was substantially a press invention of the 1920s, and the mortality figures for those actually present do not support it.
Where it came from. Howard Carter opened the tomb in November 1922 under an exclusive newspaper contract with The Times, which locked every other paper out of the biggest story in the world. Excluded journalists needed copy, and supernatural speculation was copy they could write without access. Arthur Conan Doyle, then a committed spiritualist, lent public credibility to the idea that elemental spirits might guard the tomb.
The death that launched it. Lord Carnarvon, who funded the excavation, died in Cairo in April 1923 from blood poisoning following an infected mosquito bite aggravated by shaving. He was 56 and in poor health, having never fully recovered from a motoring accident years earlier. Reports that the lights of Cairo failed at the moment of his death, and that his dog died simultaneously in England, circulated widely and are unverifiable.
No curse inscription exists at the tomb. Texts sometimes quoted are either from other sites or invented.
What the numbers show. A 2002 study in the British Medical Journal examined the Westerners present at the tomb's opening and at the sarcophagus and found no significant difference in survival compared with a control group. Carter himself — who opened the tomb, handled everything, and would have been the obvious target — lived until 1939, seventeen years afterwards.
The plausible non-supernatural risks are worth noting without overstating them: enclosed tombs can harbour moulds and bacteria, and archaeologists working in hot dusty conditions faced real infectious disease. But nothing suggests anything unusual happened here.
Why it persists. It is an excellent story, it attached itself to the most famous archaeological find ever made, and it has been sustained by film and fiction ever since. The genuinely interesting questions about the tomb — the disputed cause of the young king's death, and the argument over who should hold the objects — get far less attention.