Future conditional

[Σεβαστός]

I came across this elegiac today by Ovid: "sanguine letifero totus miscebitur orbis / ni teneant rigidae condita bella serae". What I am confused about is the apodosis, in this case the first part of the sentence - is the reason it's future indicative rather than present subjunctive like the protasis, as you would expect, to simply make it more vivid, and, if so, then why didn't he just use future indicative all the way through? Thanks so much for anyone's help.

[Nesrad]

I don't see anything unusual here. The normal construction for nisi is future in the first clause and subjunctive in the second: "Nemo mihi persuadebit eos tanta esse conatos... nisi animo cernerent." (Cic.)

[Σεβαστός]

Thanks Nesrad for your reply. I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's normal for "nisi" to simply follow the "si" constructions, which by and large means indicative in both protasis and apodosis or subjunctive in both. So as far as I'm aware these two examples are exceptions rather than the norm - my guess is that they are somewhere in between real and unreal conditions.

[Nesrad]

Yes, I think you're right.