This is completely unrelated, by the way.

As part of Britain creating a trade deal with the EU, Greece has inserted a clause stating that the Elgin Marbles, or the Parthenon Marbles should be returned to them.

Why is this important, again? The year is 1801. Thomas Bruce, Earl of Elgin, fears for the destruction of artwork. He reached out a few years before to the British government with regards to taking casts and drawings of old art, and the government was entirely uninterested, according to Tommy. Tommy decides to do it himself. He hires some men, who go to the Parthenon, and other structures in Greece, and begins removing and shipping priceless artwork and history back. About 11 years later, his work of removing the art is completed, and Tommy intends to use it to decorate his private home. Due to divorce debts (questionable, but considering he's spent £70,000 on appropriating marble from the Parthenon, not unlikely!), Tommy is forced to sell the set, eventually to the British government for £35000.

Now, appropriation is all well and right, apparently, even when Greece itself asks for them back. Greece has requested the return repeatedly for at least two centuries now, and the original document stating that Lord Elgin was allowed to take the pieces was never produced, the translated copy is highly suspect and not documented in records, and the translation states something along the lines of "you may take some of the derelict pieces", not any. What a mess. But, entirely on par with museums appropriating cultural artwork and refusing to return them to the people.

Bringing it back, if this remains in the trade clause (and it's highly likely that it will), then Greece will get their priceless marbles returned to them. Good for you, Greece. :)

~Helsinki