Archean cratons are dispersed crustal fragments derived from larger ancestral landmasses. Their individual and combined study in paleogeographic reconstructions reveal details relevant to understanding larger Archean tectonic systems. Canada's Superior craton is considered the central piece of the late Archean Superia supercraton paleogeographic reconstruction that also includes the Karelia-Kola (Finland/Russia), Wyoming (USA), and Hearne (Canada) cratons. The relationship between Superior and Karelia-Kola is of interest because the position of the Karelia-Kola craton within the context of the Superia reconstruction is not fully resolved. Dyke swarm correlations based on age and geometry indicate that Karelia-Kola and Superior were 'nearest-neighbours', yet paleomagnetic studies disagree. However, these data are complicated due to multiple metamorphic overprints, and are limited by a lack of high-precision U-Pb ages. The focus of this study is to test the correlation between the Karelia-Kola and Superior cratons by integrating U-Pb geochronology, whole-rock major, trace element and Sm-Nd isotope geochemistry, and dyke swarm geometry. These methods confirm the occurrence of sharply timed large igneous provinces (LIP) in Karelia-Kola correlated to Superior using geochronology, test whether the magmas were from a common source, and refine the paleogeographic Superia reconstruction by incorporating regional dyke trends. This study presents nine ages from dykes and sills that confirm LIP correlations between the Karelia-Kola and Superior cratons at ca. 2.40 Ga, 2.22 Ga, 2.11 Ga and 1.98 Ga, and three ages at ca. 2.32 Ga confined to Karelia-Kola. Geochemical studies were completed on mafic magmatic events at ca. 2.22 Ga and 2.11 Ga. The evaluation of 2.22 I have been fortunate to work under the guidance of three passionate supervisors. Dr. Wouter Bleeker's role has been fundamental to my development as a scientist, and the progression of this thesis as a whole. I would like to thank Dr. Richard E. Ernst for his encouragement to pursue graduate school in 2010 and again in 2014, and for his belief in me over the years. I am appreciative to have had Dr. Brian Cousens across the hall, whose open-door was a necessity for understanding and interpreting geochemistry. I would also like to acknowledge the unofficial supervision I received from Dr. Sandra L. Kamo at the University of Toronto. She is a skilled scientist and a natural teacher who has made a substantial contribution to this thesis. Sandra let me learn geochronology at my own pace, even when that meant I might not do something perfectly the first time. When I did make a mistake, we discussed it not as a failure, but as a learning experience. In doing so, she gave me the confidence to try more lab work, then helped me realize that it is something that I can do, and more importantly, something that I really enjoy.