Enos characterized the Lamanites as being wild, ferocious, blood-thirsty hunters, eating raw meat and wandering in the wilderness mostly unclothed (Enos 1:20). Jarom now reinforces that picture by saying that "they (the Lamanites) would drink the blood of beasts" (Jarom 1:6). Jarom then makes a key comment that "they (the Lamanites) were exceeding more numerous than . . . the Nephites" (Jarom 1:6). According to John Sorenson, this situation, that is the disproportionate growth in the population of the Lamanites, is so contrary to the record of human history that it cannot be accepted at face value. Typically, hunting peoples do not capture enough food energy in the form of game, plus non-cultivated plant foods they gather, to feed as large or as dense a population as farmers can. Almost invariably, settled agriculturalists successfully support a population a number of times greater. It would be incredible for Lamanites living only under the economic regime reported by Enos to have supported the superior population he credits to them. How can we explain their numbers?
Only one explanation is plausible. The early Lamanites had to have included, or to have dominated, other people who lived by cultivation. Their crops would have been essential to support the growth in overall "Lamanite" population. Such a situation is not uncommon in history; predatory hunter/warrior groups often enough have come to control passive agriculturalists off whose production they feed via taxation or tribute. . . . After all, that is what the Lamanites later did to the Zeniffites, taking a "tax" of up to half their production (see Mosiah 7 and 9). But this scenario works only if a settled, non-Lehite population already existed in the lands of promise when Lehi came. [John Sorenson, "When Lehi's Party Arrived, Did They Find Others in the Land?," in the Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, F.A.R.M.S., p. 26]
The Lamanites Would Drink the Blood of Beasts
In Jarom 1:6 we find that the Lamanites "loved murder and would drink the blood of beasts." One might ask why such a fact would be significant.
Vicki Alder notes that President Brigham Young taught that there is life in a physical body that is independent of the spirit. He said: "There is life in the material of the fleshly tabernacle, independent of the spirit given of God to undergo this probation." (J.D. 3:277)
The Lord has repeatedly taught in the scriptures that the life of the physical body is in the blood. God has said: "therefore I said unto the children of Israel, ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth of it shall be cut off." (Leviticus 17:14; see Leviticus 19:26; Genesis 9:4) The Lord has allowed the eating of meat, but has strongly condemned the eating of blood because it is the life of the meat. The Lord has cautioned: "Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood is the life; and thou mayest not eat it; that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the Lord." (Deuteronomy 12:23, 25; see also Leviticus 3:17, 7:26; Deuteronomy 12:16)
Blood is certainly the life stream of the human body. This red fluid performs many tasks, and no part of the body can live without it. (World Book Encyclopedia, 2:324, 1980) Because blood is the life of the body, anciently it was considered a sin against the Lord to eat it. (1 Samuel 14:33-34) The Lord promised: "I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people." (Leviticus 17:10)
In the Book of Mormon, the Lamanites violated this law and became wild and ferocious. It was said of them: "they were led by their evil nature that they became wild, and ferocious, and a blood-thirsty people, . . . And many of them did eat nothing save it was raw meat;" (Enos 1:20; see Mosiah 10:12). [Vicki Alder, Mysteries in the Scriptures: Enlightenment through Ancient Beliefs, pp. 160-161]