All such books provide some review of the history of "rival conjectures", along with presenting the latest findings & ideas.
Please remember, my post is in response to your claim regarding progress in "origin of life" studies:
These books (and many others) demonstrate there's been huge progress since George Wald in 1954.
In order to be legitimate, the rival conjectures must be appropriate to the "current thesis," not its historical antecedents.
It is THIS KIND of rhetorical "sleight-of-hand" that pricks the suspicions of even those who no credentials with which to evaluate the evidence.
Furthermore, I challenge the assertion that further "stirring of the pot" is "progress" until a meal is served. The history of science is replete with such "progress" in refining failed paradigms.
Who could forget the seminal work Hundert Autoren gegen Einstein (A Hundred Authors Against Einstein), published in 1931?