Globalisation has a simple mythology. As the story goes, beginning in the 15th century, Europeans began exploring the world. Within a few centuries, the major powers of Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Great Britain and France had established expansive colonies and empires. Wealth flowing back to Europe from the colonies provided the capital to fuel the Industrial Revolution, and thus the inequalities between the West and the rest of the world were established. Missionaries provided the moral means to rationalise conquest and colonialism through wholesale conversion to Christianity. Anthropologists, historians, and many others, including generations of indigenous peoples, know that this simplistic story does not reflect reality, and yet, many aspects of it continue to shape approaches to archaeological research. We know that people continued to practice traditional religions in various ways long after the missionaries arrived and through to the present. In archaeological studies of indigenous religion in Polynesia, with a few laudable exceptions, the implicit purpose of studying marae, heiau and langi (Polynesian sacred sites) is as a window to the pre-European past, and not as a window to how life changed in a post-European world. In the life history of sites of religious ritual, there is the pre-contact period when they were built and maintained for generations, and there is the modern-day; but the time in-between the traditional and the modern is lost or at least unacknowledged. In this paper we outline several ways to bridge the "prehistory/history divide" (Lightfoot 1995) via religious architecture in Polynesia. We argue that the study of the long-term evolution of indigenous religious practices of Känaka Maoli or Native Hawaiians, including those of the post-contact era, offers a way to take steps towards replacing colonial just-so stories with a more realistic analysis of the past built on archaeological facts (Flexner 2014). Känaka Maoli continue to practice traditional religion in various forms in the present, particularly in engagements with heiau 'temple' sites, and will continue to do so in the future (Kawelu and Pakele 2014, Tengan 2008). What historical archaeology offers is a set of links for understanding