Although not directly addressing your question, it is important to note that the Byzantines adopted the iconoclast policy in part because of the Muslims. In short, by the 8th Century, the Byzantine state had lost so many battles and so much territory that some Imperial leaders and theologians started to believe that God was angry with them because of their use of icons. The Muslims, being iconoclast, were seen as favored due to their victories.

It is made evident that some of the border regions of the Empire, possibly influenced by Muslim interaction, began to support the idea of iconoclasm to gain greater favor with God during these tough times. Leo III the Isaurian (who hailed from a region near to Muslim lands at the time) was perhaps influenced by this line of thinking. With a series of military successes following the enforcement of iconoclast policies within the Empire by the Isaurian Emperors, iconoclasm became supported as a means of "ensuring" victory in war and persisted for a time. However, when the fortunes of the Empire started to go sour even with these policies in place, the iconoclast position faltered, leading to an era of religious turmoil around the turn of the 9th Century flip-flopping between iconophile and iconoclast control. A second revival of iconoclasm occurred in the early-mid 9th Century, but it was rather short lived.

By the 10th Century, with the great military successes and gains made under the Macedonians, the iconoclast spirit solidly lost its purpose and mostly evaporated.