"What other innovations have they [the Latins] introduced contrary to the tradition of the church?
Whereas the holy icons have been piously established in honour of their divine prototypes and for their relative worship by the faithful... and they instruct us pictorially by means of colours and other material (which serve as a kind of alphabet) - these men, who subvert everything, as has been said, often confect holy images in a different manner and one that is contrary to custom. For instead of painted garments and hair, they adorn them with human hair and clothes which is not the image of hair and of a garment, but the [actual] hair and garment of a man, and hence is not an image and symbol of the prototype. These they confect and adorn in an irrelevant spirit, which is indeed opposed to holy icons.
Symeon of Thessaloniki, Contra Haereses (Against Heresies)"
This is the beginning of Chapter 13, "The migrating Image: Uses and abuses of Byzantine icons in Western Europe" (Barbara Zeitler) of the book "Icon and Word: the Power of Images in Byzantium" (Antony Eastmond)
Other excellent books are :
"Images, Iconoclasm, and the Carolingians" (2009) by Thomas F. X. Noble
"Image and relic: mediating the sacred in early medieval Rome" (2002) by Erik Thunø
"Roma felix: formation and reflections of medieval Rome" ( 2007)
"Romanesque Wall Painting in Central France The Politics of Narrative" by Marcia Kupfer (1993)
"The Pictorial Arts of the West, 800-1200" (1993) by Charles Reginald Dodwell
"Ars sacra, 800-1200" (1994 ) by Peter Lasko
These are elucidating accounts little known that help form a solid identiy of any Latin rite Orthodox christian concerning sacred art as it was before and shortly after the schism, which is I think very much how it ought to be today.No
, statues were not used in the west before the schism. Never, ever, ever - ever. This is a popular and important question.
The west did not develop a great popularity with panel icons, they were known but less common, moreso in italy than other regions, they venerated relics and wall frescos instead. Panel icons became very popular after the crusader period began, partly from contact with the east, this popularily with them is what led the humanist individualist secular art we find it art museums today to exist. For by the year 1280 the traditional panel icons were quickly being replaced by the new form of duccio, giotto and their students which by the 14th c wiped away much of the past forever. The influence to change into the humanist style was a mixture of Norman/french influence (who had conquered much of italy under the Hautville line, Roger I and Roger II of Sicily, came from france) and local italian influence stimulated by their own universities such as palermo and bologna. The attitude toward imagery was always somewhat different from the east.
However numerous examples of more traditional iconography survived in italy until the 16th c. however by that time and since giotto's time they were being derided as rustic village art less worthy of the aristocracies money to adorn any churches or shrines with.
Statues in terms of devotional objects, to be seen as a substitute for flat panel icons in the west evolved from reliquaries that contained relics and were made in the shape of the saint that they came from. Gradually they stopped putting relics in them, and stopped covering them with gold leaf. Than with the humanistic influence of late 12th c. and 13th c. Paris (the center of socalled "gothic' ethos) they gained lifelife paint over them. Thus the statue was born.
By the 14th century the 3 dimensional life life coloured statues are everywhere! Although statues became popular a bit later in italy, which maintained primacy of fresco and bas relief longer than in france and longer than in germany, which by than was under more french influence (before 13th c. more italian influence).
Statues as far as architectural decoration is a different subject. The book to read for that is "Romanesque Sculpture:The Revival of Monumental Stone Sculpture in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries" by Millard Hearn . This covers the architectural statuary revival on 13th c. french churches as well, which barely existed in the 12th c. before 1180 AD. It very clearly relates and shows in pictures the evolution from bas relief to free standing between 1090-1200 AD.
No question to my mind, if Italy had been left to it's own devices it would have largely remained in more harmony with the Orthodox east, being culturally more similar to Greece. France primarily artistically and eventually germany secondarily and moreso politically/theologically were the main culprits in terms of unorthodox art and architectural elements