Just a second thought -
60mm was generlly the shortest focal length made in wide-angles around 1910. Later on, with the increasing popularity of rollfilm, shotrer lenses were made as well (but not to my knowledge Hypergons or WA Protars, although B&L may have made some. Zeiss at least didn't, I think).
But for 60mm on 6x9 you need only about 80° of coverage, which is well withing the range of many other lenses when well stopped down. Since you're after "fuzziness", there should be no need for a $1000+ lens? Most 75-80mm lenses for old 6x6-6x4.5 folders will give fuzzy images on 6x9 at f:22 or so if you avoid the "better" ones - a Tessar will not cover, but an Eurynar should. In general the slowest lenses have the biggest coverage - an f:3.5 lens will probably not cover, a f:6.8 most likely will. So look for cheap old cameras (with slower, softer lenses) in smaller sizes - you could buy a lot of these for even the price of a Protar.
I'm not certain of the coverage of triplet lenses - they weren't very common in Germany at the beginning of last century. I have reason to believe the coverage may be markedly less than the anastigmats?