SHORT HISTORY, LONG ECHOES · B2/C1 · 50 min

Anne Frank

A girl who kept a diary in a hidden annexe for two years, and whose voice became the way the world learned to hear six million.

Today: you'll tell the story of a family that hid for two years behind a bookcase in Amsterdam, and of the papers one of them left behind — and you'll master the historic present, the tense storytellers use to pull a past event forward and make a listener feel it happening now.
Warm up — a few words worth carrying with you. Each comes from an earlier story in this series. Met it before? Say what it means and use it in a sentence of your own. New to you? Even better. Reveal to check — and follow a link if you'd like to read the story it comes from.
a regime — from Nelson Mandela
Neutral word or negative one?
a regime (n) — a government or system of rule, especially an authoritarian one.
to flee — from Marie Antoinette
What are its past forms?
to flee (v) — to run away from danger. flee – fled – fled.
a decree — from The Dancing Plague of 1518
Who is able to issue one?
a decree (n) — an official order issued by someone in authority, carrying the force of law.
an eyewitness — from Pompeii
Why do historians value one so highly?
an eyewitness (n) — someone who was present at an event and can describe it directly.
a manuscript — from The Library of Alexandria
How is it different from a book?
a manuscript (n) — a handwritten document, or an author's text before printing.

Now — the words for today's story

Each new word is paired with a plainer one you know. For each pair, say what the new word adds — is it stronger, colder, more official, more precise? Say it aloud, answer the question, then reveal.

1. to treat badly → to persecute — the first fits a rude neighbour. What does the second tell us about who is doing it, and for how long?
to persecute (v) — to treat a group cruelly and systematically over time because of their religion, race or politics, usually with a state behind it. Far heavier, and never accidental.
2. a spare room → an annexe — which suggests a separate part of a building, with its own entrance?
an annexe (n) — a building, or part of one, added to or standing behind a main building. (US spelling: annex.) The Dutch achterhuis, the back house of a canal building, is translated this way.
3. secret → clandestine — how much more formal is the second, and what does it hint about the reason for the secrecy?
clandestine (adj) — kept secret because it is forbidden or dangerous. Formal: used of meetings, networks and operations, not surprise parties.
4. to send someone away → to deport — what does the second add about authority, borders and consent?
to deport (v) — to force a person out of a country by order of the state. Noun: deportation. In this period it means forced removal to the camps, and carries that weight.
5. staying indoors → confinement — one is a choice and one usually is not. Which is which?
confinement (n) — being kept in a small or closed space and unable to leave. Verb: to confine. It implies a limit imposed from outside.
6. going without things → deprivation — the second is more formal and more serious. What sort of things does it refer to?
deprivation (n) — the lack of basic things people need: food, warmth, sleep, safety. Verb: to deprive someone of something. A formal, serious register.
7. a helper → a benefactor — a helper carries your shopping. What does a benefactor give, and at what cost?
a benefactor (n) — someone who gives significant help, money or protection to another. Formal; it suggests real generosity, and in wartime, real risk.
8. a story about what happened → testimony — one could be gossip. What does the second claim about truth and purpose?
testimony (n) — a formal account by a witness, offered as evidence of what happened. Used in courts and in history. Verb: to testify.
9. to check → to authenticate — you check a shopping list. What are you establishing when you authenticate a document?
to authenticate (v) — to prove by examination that something is genuine. Noun: authentication; adj: authentic. A technical, evidence-based word.
10. a terrible crime → an atrocity — how much stronger is the second, and on what scale?
an atrocity (n) — an act of extreme cruelty and violence against many people, usually in war or persecution. One of the strongest words English has.

Now use them — out loud

Talk it through before we read:
  • A family hid in an annexe in occupied Amsterdam for two years. Using clandestine, confinement, benefactor and deprivation, predict four things that life would have involved day to day.
  • Rank the ten from the most official (the language of governments and documents) to the most human (the language of people living through it). Where does the line fall?

The story, in three parts

Read each part. After it there's a quick comprehension check (try it from memory first), then one thing to discuss. The narrative is told in the present tense — notice how that feels.

Part 1 — A family that ran, and was caught up anyway

Annelies Marie Frank is born in Frankfurt on 12 June 1929, the second daughter of Otto and Edith Frank. Her sister Margot is three years older. The family is Jewish, comfortable and, by its own sense of itself, thoroughly German. Then the ground shifts. The Nazi party takes power in 1933, and a state that had guaranteed its citizens' rights begins removing them from some of those citizens. Jews are pushed out of public employment, universities and whole professions. To persecute a minority by law rather than by mob is slower and quieter than open violence, and harder to resist, because each new rule looks survivable on its own. Otto Frank does not wait to see where the sequence ends. He leaves for Amsterdam in 1933, and by early 1934 the whole family has followed. There he builds a business selling pectin, the setting agent for jam, and later one dealing in herbs and spices. The girls learn Dutch and go to Dutch schools. For six years the Franks are what we would now call a refugee family, and it works. Anne grows up talkative, bookish and quick.

On 10 May 1940 German forces invade the Netherlands. Within five days the Dutch army has surrendered, and the country the Franks fled to is under the government they fled from. What follows is not sudden. It arrives as paperwork. Jews must register. Jewish businesses must be declared and, in time, handed to non-Jews; Otto transfers his firms on paper to trusted colleagues so that they can keep trading. Jewish children are removed from their schools and sent to separate Jewish ones. Then come the exclusions: from trams, parks, cinemas, swimming pools, and from shops outside certain hours. From May 1942 every Jew over the age of six must wear a yellow star sewn to their clothing. Each measure arrives as a decree, and each is obeyed, because the alternative is unclear and the penalty is not. The effect is a life made steadily smaller, until it will fit inside a few rooms. On 12 June 1942, for her thirteenth birthday, Anne is given a small cloth-covered notebook with a red and white checked cover. She begins writing almost at once, addressing her entries to an imagined friend.

Three weeks later the paperwork reaches the family. On 5 July 1942 a call-up notice arrives for Margot, then sixteen, ordering her to report for a labour camp in Germany. Notices of this kind are how the deportations begin: people are not seized in the street but summoned by letter. Otto has been quietly preparing for months, and the family does not comply. The next morning, in heavy rain, wearing several layers of clothing because luggage would attract attention, the Franks walk across Amsterdam to Otto's premises at 263 Prinsengracht and disappear into the rooms behind and above the offices. The Dutch call the back part of a canal house the achterhuis; in English it has always been the Secret Annexe. The move is clandestine in the fullest sense: they leave an unmade bed and a note hinting that they have fled to Switzerland, so that neighbours and police look in the wrong direction. Within a week they are joined by Hermann and Auguste van Pels and their son Peter, and in November by a dentist, Fritz Pfeffer. Eight people, behind a door that will shortly be hidden by a bookcase.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. Why did the Franks leave Germany, and why did that move eventually fail to protect them?

2. What single event pushed the family into hiding, and when?

1. They left in 1933–34 because the Nazi regime had begun to persecute Jews by law. It failed because Germany invaded the Netherlands in May 1940 and imposed the same decrees there.

2. A call-up notice ordering sixteen-year-old Margot to report for a labour camp, delivered on 5 July 1942. The family went into hiding the next morning.

Discuss:
  • The restrictions came in small stages, each apparently survivable. Why is a slow sequence of decrees harder to recognise and resist than a single dramatic act?

Part 2 — Two years behind a bookcase

The rules of the annexe are set by the warehouse below. From the start of the working day until six in the evening, while staff who know nothing work one floor away, the eight cannot run water, use the lavatory, walk in shoes or cough without smothering it. They speak in whispers or not at all. The windows stay covered even when daylight would be safe, because a moved curtain is a question someone might ask. In the evenings the annexe expands a little: they come down into the empty offices and listen to the BBC and to Dutch broadcasts from London. Their survival depends entirely on four employees of Otto's firm — Miep Gies, Bep Voskuijl, Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler — who know everything and say nothing. Each becomes a benefactor in the exact sense: someone who gives at real cost to themselves. They buy food with black-market ration cards, bring books, newspapers and birthday presents, and maintain downstairs the fiction that nothing is happening upstairs. Miep Gies spent the rest of her long life refusing the word hero, insisting she had done only what any decent person would do. Very few did.

Confinement of this kind does not produce saints, and Anne never pretends it does. Eight people who did not choose one another are pressed together for two years with nowhere to go, and she records the results without flattery, including her own share in them. There are arguments about food, about noise, about who has insulted whom, about whether a girl of thirteen should take orders from a dentist she barely knows. She is sharp about the adults, and sharpest about her mother, with whom she cannot find a way to be gentle; she is also increasingly hard on herself, and returns to her earlier judgements to soften or dispute them. Underneath the frictions runs real deprivation. The food worsens until there are long stretches of spoiled potatoes and little else; everyone falls ill and no doctor can be called; burglaries in the warehouse leave them rigid with fear. What is striking, though, is how much of the diary is ordinary — books, films, growing up, a cautious attachment to Peter van Pels, and a serious ambition to write.

In March 1944 the annexe hears a broadcast from London. Gerrit Bolkestein, education minister of the Dutch government in exile, appeals to ordinary people to preserve their diaries and letters so that the occupation can one day be documented from below. Anne takes this seriously and professionally. She starts rewriting her diary on loose sheets, cutting, sharpening, giving the others invented names, shaping two years of entries into a book she means to publish; she even has a title, the Dutch word for the back house. She is fifteen, and now consciously producing testimony rather than a private journal. On the morning of 4 August 1944 a car stops outside 263 Prinsengracht. Officers of the German security police, with Dutch collaborators, climb the stairs, pull the bookcase aside and arrest all eight, with Kleiman and Kugler. Searching for valuables, they empty a briefcase onto the floor and leave Anne's papers lying there as worthless. Miep Gies gathers them up, puts them in a drawer and does not read them. How the police came to know has never been established.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. Name two things the helpers did, and one thing the eight could not do during working hours.

2. Why did Anne begin rewriting her diary in 1944?

1. Helpers: brought food bought with black-market ration cards, brought books and news, kept the secret. During working hours the eight could not run water, use the lavatory, wear shoes or speak normally.

2. After a broadcast from the Dutch government in exile asked people to keep diaries and letters as a record of the occupation, she decided to shape hers into a publishable book.

Discuss:
  • Anne wrote unsparingly about the people she was hiding with, and about herself. Does knowing she later revised the diary for publication change how we read those judgements?

Part 3 — The papers on the floor, and after

Who informed on the annexe, if anyone did, is still unknown. Repeated investigations since the war have produced no answer historians accept. A widely publicised cold-case study published in 2022 named an Amsterdam notary as the probable informant; specialists attacked its evidence so heavily that the publisher withdrew the book, and the case is not proved. It is also possible that no one betrayed them at all, and that the raid grew out of an inquiry into ration-card fraud in the warehouse. What happens next is documented. The eight are deported along the route taken by roughly a hundred thousand Jews sent out of the Netherlands, of whom only a few thousand return. They go first to Westerbork, a transit camp in the north-east, and then, on 3 September 1944, on the last train from the country to Auschwitz. The family is separated on arrival. Edith Frank dies in Auschwitz in January 1945, and Hermann van Pels is killed there. Fritz Pfeffer dies in northern Germany at the end of 1944; Peter van Pels at Mauthausen in May 1945; Auguste van Pels in the spring of 1945, in circumstances never established.

In late autumn 1944 Anne and Margot are moved to Bergen-Belsen, a camp without gas chambers and without food, water, sanitation or medicine, where typhus is spreading through grossly overcrowded huts. Both sisters die there within days of each other, in February or March 1945; the exact dates are unknown. British troops reach Bergen-Belsen on 15 April 1945, weeks later; what they find there is filmed and broadcast, and becomes the way much of Britain first grasps what the camps were. Anne was fifteen. Of the eight who hid in the annexe, one survives: Otto Frank, liberated from Auschwitz by Soviet forces in January 1945. He learns of Edith's death on the journey home and reaches Amsterdam in June, still searching for his daughters; confirmation comes in July, from a woman who had been with them at Belsen. Only then does Miep Gies fetch the papers and hand them over, unread. Otto edits the material — combining her original entries with her rewritten sheets, and omitting passages about her mother and her body that he judged private — and after several rejections a Dutch publisher issues Het Achterhuis in the summer of 1947.

The English translation appears in 1952; the diary has since been translated into something like seventy languages and read in the tens of millions. The house at 263 Prinsengracht, once due for demolition, was saved by public campaign and opened as a museum in 1960; over a million visitors a year now climb the same narrow stairs. Editions from the 1980s onwards restore what Otto removed. Almost as old as the diary is the claim that it is a forgery: because one credible witness is harder to argue with than a statistic, denial needs it to be false. The Dutch state institute for war documentation answered in the most literal way available, commissioning a forensic examination of the manuscripts — handwriting, ink, paper, glue — and publishing the results in 1986 in a vast critical edition. The diary was authenticated in detail, and the denial continued anyway, which tells you what denial is for. A harder question remains, and it is not asked in bad faith. Six million people were murdered, and the mind cannot hold six million; it can hold one girl. Does that voice open the atrocity to us, or give us somewhere comfortable to stop looking? Anne Frank left a book about being alive. What was done to her is not in it.

Quick check — answer from memory, then reveal:

1. How did the diary come to be published, and by whom?

2. What did the 1986 critical edition establish, and why was it thought necessary?

1. Miep Gies had kept the scattered papers unread and gave them to Otto Frank, the only survivor of the eight, once his daughters' deaths were confirmed. He edited them, and a Dutch publisher brought the book out in 1947.

2. A forensic study of handwriting, ink, paper and glue authenticated the manuscripts as genuine. It was undertaken because deniers had long claimed the diary was a forgery.

Discuss:
  • For many people the diary is the first, and sometimes the only, account of the Holocaust they read. Is one clear, sympathetic voice the best way into an event of that scale — or does it risk making the scale itself invisible?

Grammar — the historic present

Look again at the story: almost all of it is in present tenses, though everything in it happened more than eighty years ago. Anne is born in Frankfurt. The family goes into hiding. A car stops outside. This is the historic present, or narrative present. It is one of the most useful tools a speaker has, because it removes the distance between listener and event — and it is a choice with consequences, worth weighing with a subject like this.

How it is formed:
Use ordinary present tenses for events that are finished and past. Time expressions stay in the past — only the verbs change.
• Present simple for each step: "On 5 July 1942 a notice arrives for Margot."
• Present continuous for background: "Typhus is spreading through the huts."
• Present perfect for what came before: "By 1934 the family has followed him."
• will for what is still ahead: "A door that will shortly be hidden by a bookcase."
When we use it — and when we don't:
• anecdotes and jokes: "So I walk in and he is standing there…"
• summarising books and films: "Anne receives a diary for her birthday."
• narrating history for effect, especially in documentaries and podcasts.
• Be consistent. The commonest error is drifting into the past mid-story: "The notice arrives and the family left."
• Watch the register. It creates urgency, but can feel dramatic, which some subjects do not want. Serious writing often keeps the past for judgement and the present for the scene.

1. Make it immediate

Rewrite each sentence in the historic present. Keep the time expressions unchanged.

1. Otto Frank left Germany in 1933. → Otto Frank Germany in 1933.

2. The family went into hiding the next morning. → The family into hiding the next morning.

3. By March 1944 she had written for nearly two years. → By March 1944 she for nearly two years.

1. leaves

2. goes

3. has been writing (or has written) — a past perfect becomes a present perfect

2. Spot the drift

Each sentence starts in the historic present, then slips back into the past. Write the corrected verb.

1. A notice arrives for Margot, and the next day the family walked across Amsterdam. →

2. She is fifteen when she began to rewrite the diary. →

3. Otto returns to Amsterdam, but he had not yet learned what had happened to his daughters. →

1. walks

2. begins

3. has not yet learned (the present perfect is the historic-present equivalent of the past perfect)

3. Complete the passage

Put each verb into the historic present, then read the paragraph aloud and listen to the effect.

On the morning of 4 August 1944 a car (stop) outside. Officers (climb) the stairs and (pull) the bookcase aside. By then the eight (hide) there for more than two years. The officers (leave) the papers on the floor, and Miep Gies (gather) them up.

stops · climb · pull · have been hiding (or have hidden) · leave · gathers

Only the verbs move into the present; the dates stay where they are. That mismatch creates the sense of standing in the room.

Hold on to the historic present — you'll need it in the Speak tab, where you'll tell the whole story as though it were unfolding now.

Hear it for real

You've read the story and you have the words — so now the real thing is within reach. There's a full podcast episode that tells this story in much greater depth, in natural, real-speed English. It's optional: the lesson stands on its own without it.

🎧 Heard it already? Then treat everything so far as your recap — and listen out below for the extra detail the episode adds. Haven't? You've lost nothing: you now know the story and the key vocabulary, which is exactly what makes a fast native podcast suddenly followable. Listen before next time.

Short History Of… Anne Frank

From the Noiser podcast network. Hosted by historians, roughly 50 minutes. Search "Short History Of Anne Frank" on Spotify to open the episode.

Open the show on Spotify →

Listen out for — and bring back to talk about

As you listen (now or for homework):
  • The episode has more room than this lesson for the helpers — Miep Gies, Bep Voskuijl, Johannes Kleiman and Victor Kugler. What does it tell you about what they risked, and what became of them?
  • Find one detail the episode adds that this lesson left out — about the building, the daily routine, or the raid of 4 August 1944 — and be ready to explain it in your own words.
  • Listen for two or three of today's key words used naturally by the historians (persecute, annexe, clandestine, deport, confinement, benefactor, testimony, atrocity…). How were they used — and did the narration use the historic present too?

Speak

This is the heart of the lesson — do it all out loud. The timer keeps you going: fill the time with detail rather than escaping it.

Useful language: lean on the historic present — the family goes into hiding, a notice arrives, the police climb the stairs, by then they have been hiding for two years. For opinions: "What strikes me most is…", "It's worth remembering that…", "I'd want to be careful here, because…", "You could argue the opposite: …".
Time remaining: 4:00
Task A · Tell the whole story (4 minutes)

Tell the story of Anne Frank in your own words, to someone who knows only the name. Follow the arc: a Jewish family leaves Germany for Amsterdam → the occupation brings the same decrees → a call-up notice sends eight people into the annexe → two years of confinement, sustained by four employees → the raid of 1944 and the deportations → the papers on the floor, the one survivor, and the book.

Tell it in the historic present throughout, and work in at least five key words (persecute, annexe, clandestine, deport, confinement, deprivation, benefactor, testimony, authenticate, atrocity). Keeping the tense consistent is the hard part.

Task B · One voice, or six million (4 minutes)

Millions were murdered, and most left no record. The diary of one articulate teenager has done more to teach the Holocaust than any statistic. Build a case: does individual testimony make an atrocity comprehensible, or let us feel we have understood something we have not? What is lost when one story stands for so many — and what would be lost without it?

Task C · A record worth keeping (4 minutes)

The Dutch minister's broadcast asked ordinary people to keep their letters and diaries so that history could be written from below. Talk about a personal record — yours or someone else's — and why it matters. Narrate it in the historic present: she writes it down, puts it in a drawer, and years later someone opens it.

Stuck for an idea? Pick one of these and run with it:

  • A letter, diary or photograph in your family, and what it records.
  • A story an older relative tells that exists nowhere in writing.
  • A museum or memorial you have visited, and what it preserved.
  • A period of your life you did or did not write down — and whether you regret it.
  • An event in your country's history remembered mainly through one person's account.
  • Whether an online record counts as the same thing, and what will survive of it.

To finish — the bigger questions

  1. Anne revised her diary with publication in mind. Does that make it a more valuable historical document, or a less direct one?
  2. Four employees kept eight people alive for two years at enormous risk, and one of them spent her life refusing to be called a hero. What made the difference between those who helped and those who did not?
  3. The manuscripts were authenticated in 1986 and denial continued regardless. What does that tell us about the limits of evidence in an argument never really about evidence?
  4. Before you go — from memory: narrate the events of 4 August 1944 in five sentences, entirely in the historic present, including one present perfect for what had already happened by then. Then say what the tense added — and whether you would use it for this subject.