In many ways the Comana Monastery near Bucharest is a better candidate for Vlad’s burial site than Snagov Monastery. While tradition holds that Vlad founded Snagov, this cannot be corroborated by extant documentary evidence. Those records have been lost. The proof that Dracula founded Comana is still available, though this in itself doesn’t mean much. Comana, though, is closer to the site where Vlad is believed to have been killed in late 1476. Comana lies between Bucharest and the fortress of Giurgiu. It is also located on a hilltop, and according to Russian sources, Dracula was killed atop a hill where he was surveying his men’s battle with the Turks, assassinated by the very soldiers who accompanied him. (Dirty backstabbers.)
The theory, then, is that the monks from Comana would have carried the body inside for burial, but no such grave was ever located there (and a revered personage like Vlad would not have been buried *outside* the monastery). And claims that a headless skeleton were disinterred there have been discredited. There is no credible evidence that Vlad was ever buried in Comana. It’s all just historical guesswork. Of the two sites, I prefer Snagov, not because I think it has any historical claims on Vlad that Comana doesn’t have. I just like the tradition of it, and the fact that the island whereupon Sangov rests is said to be rife with paranormal activity. If Comana is said to be haunted, I’ve never heard anything about it.