That is an interesting theory, but the objects pictured were not weapons; they were adornment. Well, maybe you could think of them as a woman’s, or a man’s, weapons, used to provoke envy in onlookers.
It’s not my theory and I don’t completely agree with it. Maybe you should apply for a job as a professional archaeologist — you seem to have all the answers. If your computer could access Google you’d learn the artifacts are nearly all parts of weapons. But you wouldn’t want to burden your great intuitive skills with any actual facts, would you?