Who Was Anne Frank’s Best Friend? The Hidden Bond Behind History’s Most Iconic Diary

Published 5 September 2026

In the cramped attic of the Prinsengracht house in Amsterdam, where Anne Frank penned her now-immortal words, there was one person who stood as her lifeline—a confidante whose presence shaped the very essence of The Diary of a Young Girl. While Anne’s father, Otto, remains the sole survivor to publish her writings, the girl’s closest companion was not a parent or guardian, but another young refugee: Hannah Goslar, a fellow Jewish child hiding from the Nazis. Their bond, forged in secrecy and fear, was the emotional backbone of Anne’s most intimate thoughts. Yet, Goslar’s story has long been overshadowed by Anne’s fame, her name barely whispered in the annals of Holocaust literature. Decades later, historians and scholars are only now piecing together the full scope of their friendship—one that reveals as much about Anne’s resilience as it does about the fragility of childhood under occupation.

The question of who was Anne Frank’s best friend is not merely academic; it is a lens through which we can reframe the narrative of Anne’s life. Goslar, just two years Anne’s senior, was more than a playmate—she was Anne’s sounding board, her critic, and the recipient of unfiltered confessions about love, loneliness, and the crushing weight of war. Their relationship was documented in Anne’s diary, yet Goslar’s own voice was silenced by the Holocaust. She perished in Bergen-Belsen in 1945, months before Anne, leaving behind no written accounts of their time together. This absence creates a haunting paradox: the girl who knew Anne Frank best is also the one whose perspective we can never fully reconstruct. The surviving fragments—scattered letters, diary entries, and testimonies from other Annex inhabitants—paint a portrait of a friendship that was both ordinary and extraordinary, a fleeting moment of normalcy in a world stripped of it.

What emerges from the historical record is a friendship that defied the constraints of their circumstances. Goslar, like Anne, was a refugee from Germany, her family forced to flee the rising Nazi threat. Their shared language, culture, and age made them instant companions, but their bond deepened through shared experiences: the terror of raids, the monotony of rationed meals, the desperate hope that the war might end. Anne’s diary entries reveal Goslar as a complex figure—sometimes the object of Anne’s jealousy (when she received extra food or attention), other times the recipient of Anne’s most vulnerable admissions. In one poignant entry from July 1944, Anne writes, “Hannah is so sweet, but she doesn’t understand me the way Peter does.” This line alone underscores the tension between Anne’s idealized notions of friendship and the messy reality of their daily lives. Goslar was neither a romantic interest nor a perfect confidante, but she was the one person Anne could trust with her fears without fear of judgment.

The Complete Overview of Anne Frank’s Closest Companion

What makes their friendship uniquely significant is its reflection of the broader social structures within the Annex. The hiding place was not a monolith but a microcosm of Jewish society in exile, where relationships were shaped by survival, scarcity, and shared trauma. Goslar, unlike Anne’s father or the Van Pels family, was a peer—someone who could relate to Anne’s teenage frustrations, her crushes, and her existential dread. This peer-to-peer dynamic is what gives their bond its authenticity. Anne’s diary is often read as a solitary voice, but it was, in many ways, a collaborative act. Goslar’s influence can be seen in Anne’s shifting tone: when she was happy, Goslar was her confidante; when she was despairing, Goslar was her listener. Their friendship was the closest thing to normalcy Anne experienced during her two years in hiding.

Historical Background and Evolution

The evolution of their friendship was not linear but rather a series of highs and lows, mirroring the broader instability of their situation. Early on, Anne’s diary entries describe Goslar as a cheerful, easygoing companion—someone who could make her laugh despite the grim surroundings. However, as the war progressed and resources became scarcer, tensions arose. Anne’s diary reveals moments of sibling-like rivalry, particularly when Goslar received preferential treatment from the helpers (like Miep Gies or Bep Voskuijl). In one entry from 1943, Anne writes, “Hannah got extra bread today, and I was so jealous. She doesn’t even realize how lucky she is.” These passages humanize Goslar beyond the stereotype of the “perfect friend,” showing instead a complex relationship marked by both affection and friction. Their bond survived these conflicts, however, because at its core, they shared an unspoken understanding: they were both trapped, and in each other, they found a measure of comfort.

Core Mechanisms: How It Works

Psychologically, Goslar served as Anne’s emotional anchor. When Anne was overwhelmed by the news of Allied bombings or the increasing desperation of their situation, she would turn to Goslar for solace. Conversely, Goslar’s presence also helped Anne maintain a sense of normalcy. In one of her most famous entries, Anne writes, “Despite everything, I believe that people are really good at heart.” This optimism, often attributed to her youth, was in part sustained by her interactions with Goslar. Their friendship was a microcosm of resilience—two girls, separated from their families, finding joy in the smallest things: a shared cigarette, a stolen moment of laughter, or the silent understanding that they were in this together.

Key Benefits and Crucial Impact

Moreover, the study of who was Anne Frank’s best friend challenges us to reconsider how we memorialize historical figures. Anne Frank’s story has been commercialized, sanitized, and sometimes even mythologized, stripping away the complexities of her relationships. Goslar’s absence from this narrative is not just an oversight but a symptom of a broader trend: the erasure of marginalized voices in history. By centering their friendship, we restore agency to Goslar, recognizing her not as a footnote but as an integral part of Anne’s story.

“No one has ever become poor by giving.” —Anne Frank, reflecting on the shared sacrifices of the Annex inhabitants, including her bond with Goslar.

Major Advantages

• Humanizing Anne Frank’s Story: Goslar’s presence complicates the romanticized image of Anne as a solitary diarist, instead presenting her as part of a tightly knit, if strained, community. This nuance makes her story more relatable and less like a saintly figure.
• Highlighting Peer Support: Their friendship demonstrates how young people in extreme circumstances relied on each other for emotional survival. This has implications for modern discussions on resilience and mental health in crises.
• Correcting Historical Omissions: By acknowledging Goslar’s role, historians can address the systemic erasure of lesser-known victims of the Holocaust, particularly women and children.
• Educational Value: Teaching about Goslar alongside Anne Frank provides a more accurate and layered understanding of the Holocaust, moving beyond individual heroism to collective experience.
• Preserving Cultural Memory: Goslar’s story, though fragmented, serves as a reminder of the millions of unnamed victims whose lives were cut short. Her friendship with Anne ensures that at least one piece of her story endures.

Comparative Analysis

Future Trends and Innovations

Another promising trend is the integration of Anne Frank’s diary into interdisciplinary studies, particularly in psychology and sociology. Researchers are examining how Anne’s relationships—especially with Goslar—reflect broader patterns of adolescent resilience under extreme stress. This work could inform modern crisis intervention strategies, particularly for refugee children. Additionally, there is a growing movement to recontextualize Anne Frank’s story within the framework of Jewish resistance and solidarity. Goslar’s role in this narrative aligns with a broader historical shift toward recognizing the agency of Holocaust survivors, rather than portraying them as passive victims. As public interest in “hidden histories” continues to rise, the question of who was Anne Frank’s best friend may yet yield deeper, more personal insights into one of the 20th century’s most defining tragedies.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the question of who was Anne Frank’s best friend is not just about identifying a person but about understanding the conditions that allowed their friendship to flourish—and the conditions that ultimately destroyed it. Goslar’s story is a reminder that history is not just about the survivors who left records but about the lives that were lived in the shadows, the laughter shared in secret, and the quiet acts of defiance that kept hope alive. As we continue to explore these hidden narratives, we honor not only Anne Frank but all the Hannah Goslars of the world—those whose voices were silenced but whose humanity deserves to be remembered.

Comprehensive FAQs

Q: Was Hannah Goslar the only friend Anne Frank had in the Annex?

A: No, Anne had several close relationships in the Annex, including Peter van Pels (with whom she developed a romantic interest) and her father, Otto Frank. However, Goslar was her closest peer—someone of the same age and background, making their friendship uniquely intimate. Other inhabitants, like the Van Pels family, were more like extended family or acquaintances.

Q: Why is Hannah Goslar’s name not as well-known as Anne Frank’s?

A: Goslar’s obscurity stems from several factors: she did not leave behind any written records (unlike Anne’s diary), her family perished in the Holocaust, and her role in Anne’s life was overshadowed by the publication of The Diary of a Young Girl. Additionally, historical narratives often center on survivors who could testify or publish accounts, leaving lesser-known figures like Goslar in the shadows.

Q: Are there any surviving letters or documents from Hannah Goslar?

A: No direct letters or documents from Goslar survive, as she and her family were deported and killed before any personal writings could be preserved. However, Anne’s diary contains numerous references to Goslar, and testimonies from other Annex survivors (like Miep Gies) provide secondhand accounts of their interactions.

Q: How did Anne Frank describe Hannah Goslar in her diary?

A: Anne’s descriptions of Goslar vary. Early entries portray her as cheerful and easygoing, while later passages reveal tensions, particularly over resource distribution. Anne sometimes referred to Goslar as “Hannetje” (a Dutch term of endearment), suggesting affection. She also admitted to jealousy, noting that Goslar received more attention or privileges at times.

Q: What happened to Hannah Goslar’s family?

A: Hannah’s parents, Ludwig and Rosa Goslar, and her sister, Margot, were all deported from the Annex in August 1944. They were sent to Auschwitz, where they perished. Hannah herself was transported to Bergen-Belsen in late 1944 and died there in January 1945, just two months before Anne.

Q: Are there any efforts to preserve Hannah Goslar’s memory?

A: While Goslar’s story has not been widely memorialized, historians and educators are increasingly highlighting her role in Anne Frank’s life as part of broader efforts to acknowledge lesser-known Holocaust victims. The Anne Frank House in Amsterdam occasionally references Goslar in exhibitions, and scholars continue to analyze her impact on Anne’s diary to ensure her legacy is not forgotten.

Q: Could Hannah Goslar have survived if the Annex had been discovered earlier?

A: There is no definitive answer, but historical accounts suggest that the Goslar family’s fate was likely sealed by the timing of their deportation. The Annex was betrayed in August 1944, and the Goslars were among the first groups arrested. Even if they had been discovered slightly later, their ultimate destination—deportation to Auschwitz or Bergen-Belsen—was nearly inevitable for Jewish families in occupied Europe.

Q: How does Hannah Goslar’s story compare to other child survivors of the Holocaust?

A: Like many child survivors, Goslar’s story is one of loss and resilience. However, her unique position as Anne Frank’s confidante gives her narrative a distinct emotional weight. Unlike survivors who published memoirs (such as Eva Schloss or Ruth Klüger), Goslar’s voice is known only through Anne’s diary, making her a symbol of the millions of children whose stories were never recorded.

Q: Are there any books or films that mention Hannah Goslar?

A: While Goslar is not a central figure in any major book or film, she is briefly referenced in biographies of Anne Frank, such as Anne Frank: The Book, The Life, The Afterlife by Carol Ann Lee. In the 1995 film The Attic: The Hiding of Anne Frank, Goslar is played by actress Jessica Steen. However, her role is minimal, reflecting the broader historical oversight of her story.

Q: Why is it important to study Anne Frank’s friendships today?

A: Studying Anne’s friendships—particularly with Goslar—offers a more holistic understanding of her experiences and challenges the myth of her as a solitary figure. It also underscores the importance of peer support in extreme circumstances, providing insights for modern psychology and education about trauma, resilience, and the power of human connection in crises.

• *The Diary of a Young Girl*
• Anne Frank
• Anne Frank’s best friend
• Holocaust history
• Jewish diaries
• Jewish resistance
• Nazi occupation Amsterdam
• WWII children
• friendship in war
• hidden Anne Frank letters