Hi..
No, Betts has his own theory of Tarot origins, which most dismiss. He identifies the 22 Trumps with the 22 chapters of the Book of Revelations. However, he does a good job of covering history, art history, iconography, and the early cards. So, I considered it a good read when it was published, 1998. I think this is true of a lot of origin books including Gertrude Moakley's The Tarot Cards Painted by Bonifacio Bembo. I couldn't believe that Moakley gives a good historical summary of the Hanging Man but forgets somehow to mention the 1390 Milanese decree against "Pitture infamanti" that I believe lasted until after 1450. She also finds the best examples of Tarot prototypical art for the pre-lenten parades in Flemish art, not Milanese. And she makes a jumble between jumping back and forth between Milan and Florence as if they were the same city and not at war with each other. Still, when she is "on" target, she has some great insights and she is worth reading. I thought her remark that the Triumphs were ribald take-offs insightful, even though I don't agree with her conclusions. So, I guess my point is that for those interested in the topic of Tarot origins, we read a lot of different books even though we may not agree with the conclusions. By the way, when I quoted Betts on the coins and the Charles the VI deck I went back to my decks and I realized he had made a mistake. He really meant the Minchaite deck that has a lot of medallion coins, and it is very likely that this can be connected to Pisanello's cast bronze portrait medal of John VIII Palaelogus. So, that is definitely worthwhile info. ...