I think basing the rows on words like Natural, Passion, Control and Beauty are a bit odd, as one could very easily see the virtues in each of these simultaneously (Nature's passion is life, or weather extremes, Natural control is autonomy, Beauty in Nature, etc...). I think that it is better to use pure opposites when making these sorts of rows. I.e. a Push or a Pull or like Internal vs External.
But I think table-theory for the Shards is always going to come up as poor. I think they can be grouped by fours, but you have to understand that if Dawnshards are Commands, they themselves can't be expanded into Intents. Intents give context for Commands, you feel? I think the rows could actually be natural laws, like push and pull, or passion and logic. Or even maybe a group of prepositions, like "For, With, Against, By."
Really, it feels like you can figure out a Dawnshard by reverse-engineering a Shard to the primary Command they'd give to things. But that's impossible, every Shard is an Intent, and you need to go through several actions to fulfill an Intent. Shards are virtues, emotions, traits, thoughts. Those things can't be chalked down to a Command. What in Adonalsium's name is the Command for Whimsy? Whimsify? Feel? Free? There is a large variety you could put here. Honor would want people to Feel the Honor, or be Free from hatred and mistrust from each other.
You see what I mean? It's always going to come out as imperfect. Sorry I rambled on here. But you could probably group them unsatisfactorily, always.
In any case, to be more relevant to the conversation, Autonomy is negative liberty (protection from restraint of one's personal rights). Theoretical "Unity" wouldn't be the opposite of that. The opposite of Autonomy would probably be something like Endowment, that is, giving others the goods they need in order to have free will and survive.