I'm not sure I understand where the confusion is, but fwiw, so far as I remember how things went...
In 325 a creed (based on earlier baptismal creeds) was adopted at Nicea, guarding the consubstantiality of Jesus with the Father and condemning those who say that Jesus was created or that there was a time when he did not exist. In 381 at Constantinople certain statements added to the creed, including some that defend the divinity of the Holy Spirit. Several centuries later the filioque became an issue on a very local level in the west (Spain?). By the 9th century the filioque issue was known about by both eastern and western Church leaders, and easterners like St. Photius wrote against it, but the issue was still not something that caused a lasting division. By the 11th century things had progressed and Rome officially accepted the filioque as part of the creed. Today most Catholics and Protestants, if they use it at all, use a version of the creed which has the filioque in it, while the Orthodox and some others do not.