the "islamic golden age" construct is not just reactionary, it's also revisionist in the sense that it's meant to counter biases in european history. i don't think it's particularly controversial, at this point, to acknowledge that european historians have historically been hostile to islam - as greek and roman historians were hostile to persia, and islamic historians were in turn hostile to europe. there were large, civilizational conflicts at play over huge time periods.

but, what the "islamic golden age" construct does is wrongheaded in attempting to remove disdain for reverence. it is a myth-based approach to history designed to counter the established european biases, and in doing so just converts the problem into a narrative that is no less wrong.

the arabs were thuggish despots that rapidly conquered a large area that was weakly defended due to centuries of war and then dominated it under heavy taxation. what you call islam today developed as a means to facilitate and organize these conquests. in time, they became weak and were defeated by a superior foe (the mongols).

http://www.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/17192/beyond-tolerance-and-intolerance_deconstructing-th