[Hermann the Cherusker]

Some may have been defined this way after the fact. At the time, they were as authoritative as Nicea.

If the Pope did not accept them, they were not authoritative, no matter how many other Bishops subscribed to them, and no matter how many Emperor's tried to promulgate them as law. Can you point to where the Pope sent his legates to them and signed off on their works? Otherwise, they are just another conventicle of heretics as was the infamous Robber Synod (Latrocinium) of Ephesus.

I'm afraid you will find that they were authoritative for nobody of any import in the Catholic Church. Maybe in the Arian Church or among the Arian Emperor's of Rome they were authoritative, but we are Catholics, not Arians.

[malakhi]

If the Pope did not accept them, they were not authoritative, no matter how many other Bishops subscribed to them

The Pope wasn't "the Pope" then. He was just the bishop of Rome. Frankly, the bishop of Alexandria was much more involved in the Arian controversy.

Your version of history hinges on faith, not on what really happened.