Countessmeout
Imperial Majesty
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 13,069
- City
- alberta
- Country
- Canada
Yes, but many people feel the princess should have been buried in the consecrated grounds of a church or a graveyard and not "somewhere" on an artificial island in an artificial lake, an island, noone is allowed to step on besides her family. Which would be okay if we had seen pics of them on the island. I hope one day the then king William will have Charles', Camilla's and Diana's ashes/body buried together, maybe officially in Frogmore's cemetary. But it is clear that at the time of Diana's death noone wanted to bury her officially at closed Frogmore cemetary or in a church open to the public, so the "island grave" seemed a good solution.
The Royals and the nobility have always found helpers to keep their secrets and even if people came to learn them, I doubt these people were the ones to sell it to the media including proof.
Why would William bury his parents together??? If Charles had been a widower, and remarried Camilla, it may be fitting he be buried with both wives. But he and Diana were divorced.
Unless Charles dies before his mother, he will not be buried at Frogmore. The sovereign is not buried in Frogmore. Save Victoria, every monarch since George III has been buried at St George's. Well except Edward VIII but he abdicated. Charles and Camilla would both be buried there as well. Though non monarchs like Margaret have been interred there as well, I don't see Diana's ashes being moved to be placed there among the kings and queens, and their kids.
The decision was made by Diana's family, and likely her sons included, on where she would rest. No reason to believe they would up and move them later. The family is who matters, not the public who want to 'grieve'.
By the time of King William, the need for constant public grieving should have been long over.