> the Java runtime has many of the design hallmarks of a dynamic language, with strong (generic) types somewhat bolted on.
I'd say it's the opposite. Dynamic languages largely use boxing as the indirection mechanism for their highly dynamic type systems, since it works well there. But boxing isnt synonymous with type flexibility, and Java uses it for other reasons (mostly).
The Java runtime provides runtime type information for all types, and extensive reflection is available, including for example invoking arbitrary code. Very dynamic and a significant problem for static analysis, optimisation and security.
I'd say it's the opposite. Dynamic languages largely use boxing as the indirection mechanism for their highly dynamic type systems, since it works well there. But boxing isnt synonymous with type flexibility, and Java uses it for other reasons (mostly).