From comments you have made, I think you may be making assumptions that are misleading or actually incorrect, regarding glassworking. Please allow me to expound a bit.

Glass can be submitted to a broad variety of treatments, and these are often combined. Molding (submitting a glass object to a molding process) is one of these treatments. Molding may be the essential process (whereby the object did not exist as more than softened glass prior to it application); or the object, essentially formed another way, may be submitted to some form of molding (or pressing), to alter its shape. It is the former object that is truly "molded." Although molding may be applied to other objects, they remain essentially "blown," or "wound," or "drawn," or whatever is their basic nature. For instance, from Roman times down to the present, a very popular method of making a vessel is by blowing it (on a blow-pipe). Once the vessel has a preliminary shape, it may be subjected to molding to alter, refine, or decorate is shape and surface (or all of these). It is still a "blown" vessel, but may be described as "mold-blown." It should not be thought of as being "molded," because this is not its essential method of manufacture.

Because beads are small items, they are easy to make (even taking for granted some skillful processes that require care and the investment of time), and are made in great quantities—and they are are (as mentioned above) also formed by a variety of techniques, that can include molding (or pressing). A blown bead that is eventually molded remains a blown bead. A drawn bead (though often made from a blown cane), that is also submitted to molding, remains a drawn bead. Any bead (regardless of primary manufacture) that is submitted to a molding treatment is referred to as being "Pressed." This is to distinguish it from an actual molded bead. A molded bead is one that is basically formed from softened glass in a mold—most often a two-part mold (particularly if it is of some girth—as opposed to being flat, where a one-part mold may suffice).

As I mentioned in a previous post, Chinese beadmakers did not excel in making molded beads, nor even pressed beads. Although I have studied Chinese beadmaking for many years, and have seen quite a few thousands (or millions) of them—including the very excellent specimen collections gathered by Elizabeth Harris, and now at The Bead Museum—it was not until this year (or late last year) that I was shown a group of beads/pendants that I believe are of Chinese manufacture, and are primarily molded.

The molding of glass beads, in modern times, has been a specialty of Bohemia/Czechoslovakia, and glassworks that branched off from this region (in Germany and Austria). Because the working of glass (as well as glassmaking) is most often a shared industry (one that is transferred and taught rather than locally invented, for the most part), anywhere (again, in modern times) that we find glass-molding, I would expect this to follow the Czech method(s) in its essence—because they pioneered the technique—and not so long ago.

When I was shown the Chinese beads I mention above (in photographs), my first response was that these were most likely Czech (or Central European) objects that had been exported to China. (This is not far-fetched. I have documented Czech glass in obscure places like Burma. Plus, we know that the Czech industry specialized in making copies of exotic beads for export—including many Asian types and designs, that were sent far from Europe.) It was only when I saw these items in real life that I was forced to conclude that they were indigenous to China (being strangely a departure from Czech productions in details). And, as I previously mentioned, this is why I have encouraged the owner of these pieces to publish them. They are a very unexpected group, coming out of China, and (almost for the first time) assumed to be local in Manufacture and not imported.

Consequently, when you show groups of beads, that you "believe are Chinese," and they are clearly molded, and (to my eye) look Czech, I am inclined to think you have made a mistake in identification. Added to that, your casual assumption that the Chinese made such beads, has to be challenged. I don't think you understand how unlikely this is as an assertion. And, understanding that a glass item is only "molded" when this is its primary treatment or manufacture, I have to say that items such as mold-blown snuff bottles, are also not essentially "molded"—and the fact that they exist does not have much impact on the Chinese making actual molded beads. Such a belief would be based on a shallow and inaccurate leap of faith.

Thanks for your attention.

Jamey