We have thus surveyed the whole field of repetitions of rhythmic and symmetrical units, and their difference in treatment according to the end they serve, and the results bear out our expectations. The symmetrical unit, as exemplified chiefly by an odd number of units in groups, is more used for detached enclosures; and the rhythmic type, with even numbers, is used more especially for continuous ones. In the former case the motor tendency is toward the central balance, while in the latter it is driven on out of itself through the series. When pillars support arches, the arch is the unit; when they support lintels, the pillars themselves remain the unit. Any number of units over eight loses its value of odd or even, since the difference can no longer be perceived and becomes rhythmic whether odd or even. It must not be supposed that these rules are inevitably carried out or that the effect is necessarily poor if they are not. It shows a general æsthetic demand, however, which in individual cases may be modified by other demands, or altered in parts to make a more unified whole. When, however, the series is taken for itself, and judged entirely on its own merits, these conclusions will be found generally valid. We have still to consider whether series always end with a heavy unit. All the series examined _do_ end in this way; in fact we feel the necessity of this so clearly that one illustration would be as good as a hundred. But there is a difference in the use of the end unit, which is noticeable in any two series of symmetrical and rhythmic units. Of the sixteen examples of continuous series whose units were distinctly symmetrical instead of rhythmic, eight of them, although ending on supports, do not end on the principal unit of the series. This can be best shown by one or two examples. The Orvieto Cathedral has on the façade a balustrade of rectangular reliefs alternating with supports. The reliefs are undoubtedly the more interesting and important element of the series, yet the series ends with the less important element, the support or post, and we feel that it must do so. The Palazzo Contarini has a balustrade on its façade in which carved wheel-like designs alternate with supports which come at the ends. Why, in these cases, do we feel it as inevitable that the heavier and more important unit should _not_ come at the end, as with rhythmic units we feel that they should? The answer to this is partly structural and partly æsthetic. We must feel, first of all, that the series is properly supported, that it will not fall away at the ends or down in the middle, and for this reason support of some kind must come at the end to hold it up and give a feeling of solidity and stability. But why are not these supports made the more interesting and important unit so that they might still bear up the superstructure and end the series as well? Here the æsthetic demand appears. As soon as the object is regarded as an