It is not like I just pulled it out of my rear, any more than my HS history text or Wikipedia did. - Edit 1
Before modification by Joel at 11/03/2012 05:00:10 AM
Just admit you're wrong and don't know what the fuck you're talking about. Iconoclasm was a non-issue in the Schism. The turmoil it caused in the East only tangentially led to the Schism in that Rome's interference gave it, centuries later, a precedent for papal supremacy. Period.
Did it cause the Schism? No. Would the Schism have happened without it? Yes. Did it have no effect on pre-Schism East/West relations? If the Pope intervened on behalf of iconophile Patriarchs and Charlemagne wrote a condemnation of iconoclasts based on erroneous belief they were iconophiles, it is hard to argue it did not.