One of the museums I have wanted to visit for a very long time now, is the Galerie de Paléontologie et d’Anatomie comparée. This is for a number of reasons, with the name one quite clearly discernible from the name of this institution. Stepping inside feels a bit like stepping into a Victorian naturalist’s curated dream: a long, light-filled hall where rows of cabinets and a parade of skeletons stand like silent orators of time, evolution, form, function and method. The ordered chaos of mounted skeletons, some posed mid-stride, others frozen in the stoic reverence of museum taxidermy, creates an atmosphere equal parts cathedral and laboratory. That juxtaposition is a reverence for beauty and an insistence on scientific method, is at the core of the gallery’s lasting charm. It is for this very reason that this museum has been at the top of my list of places to visit for almost two decades now. You quickly realis that you are not just looking at objects but at the layered history of how humans have studied, classified and imagined life on Earth.
The museum’s story begins in the late nineteenth century, when the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle sought a dedicated space to display its vast comparative anatomy and palaeontology holdings to the public. The present building, with its red-brick façade and sculptural decoration, was designed by the architect Frédéric Dutert and inaugurated at the close of the 1800s as part of the cultural and scientific flourish that accompanied the Exposition Universelle era. That historical moment explains the gallery’s dual identity: it was conceived as both an educational space for cutting-edge science of its day and as a grand public showpiece intended to inspire awe. The galleries were championed by academics and curators who believed that seeing specimens, skeletons and fossil casts up close was essential to scientific literacy.
Walking the comparative anatomy hall, one is struck by the intimacy of many displays. Unlike many modern museums that favour pared-back or interactive exhibits, this gallery keeps a historical style of presentation: specimens are densely arranged, labels are often traditional, and the wood-and-glass vitrines themselves are objects of history. This arrangement rewards slow looking. You can spend a long time tracing the homologous shapes of limb bones from a small mammal to a large ungulate, or read vintage labels that reveal past taxonomies and the language of a different scientific era. The gallery’s pedagogical clarity comes from its comparative approach: by setting skeletons side by side, the curators give visitors a visual grammar for understanding adaptation, convergence and homology. For the amateur naturalist or the designer of living systems, this kind of side-by-side comparison is one of the clearest ways to ‘see’ evolution. This display of skeletons alongside each other is another of the reasons why I was so determined to visit.
The gallery has an entire floor and a balcony dedicated to palaeontology, which you gain access to up a graceful cast-iron staircase and along a balcony that looks down into the comparative hall. Present here are some of the most iconic fossils and casts in Europe. You’ll encounter large mounted casts of dinosaurs like Diplodocus and Iguanodon, as well as dramatic displays of prehistoric mammals such as the woolly mammoth, the ground sloth Megatherium and giant birds like Aepyornis. The mixture of casts and authentic fossils is historically faithful: in the era when the gallery was assembled, casts were an important tool for sharing spectacular discoveries across institutions and countries. Today, seeing a cast of a famous dinosaur beside an original mammal fossil gives a nuanced sense of how science balances replication (to teach and compare) with preservation (to protect rare originals). If you’ve seen an Iguanodon in any European museum, you’ll be familiar with this cast and the Diplodocus is the exact same cast as Dippy from the Natural History Museum, in London.
Among the gallery’s headline specimens, several deserve special mention for the stories they carry. The Compsognathus, a small theropod dinosaur originally found in Europe, is a famous genuine skeleton in the collection and speaks directly to nineteenth-century paleontological history and the development of dinosaur studies. The gallery also houses authentic skulls and partial skeletons of Pleistocene megafauna including specimens of Mammuthus primigenius (the woolly mammoth) and Mammuthus meridionalis, that evoke both scientific discovery and changing climatic histories. A real Triceratops skull and casts of large saurian forms punctuate the palaeontological hall, making it possible to move from the Cretaceous to the delicate Eocene whale bones to the hulking silhouettes of Ice Age beasts within a few gallery bays. Each specimen is a node in a network of research, excavation history and display practices; labels and companion texts often sketch those networks, reminding visitors that every bone carries a provenance and a set of human stories.
The architectural setting amplifies the objects. Dutert’s iron-and-glass roof floods the palaeontology halls with diffuse daylight that shows bones in crisp relief without harsh shadows. The decorative elements (not as extravagant as in London) include carved medallions of naturalists, ornate cornices and the red-brick exterior place the museum squarely in the Belle Époque Parisian visual language, a civic architecture where science and culture were publicly displayed. That visual language matters: the building itself asserts that natural history is a public and civic concern, and that scientific objects deserve a dignified, even monumental setting. For many visitors the building is as much a draw as the content, it provides a physical frame that encourages reverence, curiosity and the slow movement of an old-fashioned museum stroll. It is these leisurely strolls that will reward you with information, feeding your curiosity and leading to future hyperfocuses.
One of the gallery’s less obvious strengths is how memory and display practices overlap there. Many of the mounts and cases are historic, meaning that the way specimens are arranged tells you about the discipline’s history as much as the specimens do. For example, 19th-century mounting techniques placed an emphasis on completeness and display drama; older taxidermy and skeletal reconstructions sometimes reflect the scientific assumptions of their day. Modern curatorial practice has slowly integrated new interpretive panels and updated nomenclature (which are mostly absent), the gallery is successful in ensuring visitors can understand which each skeleton is which without erasing past aesthetics. This layered approach allows visitors to see not only the fossils themselves but also earlier generations’ interpretations and the slow process by which scientific consensus shifts. I personally feel that this is important, while information boards can help tell the story of the specimens and how they were used, there is no replacement for seeing it with your eyes and experiencing it.
The palaeontology gallery’s strengths also show in the attention to invertebrates and plants, fossil brachiopods, trilobites, and a rich suite of fossilised plants expand the narrative beyond charismatic megafauna. These specimens remind the viewer that Earth’s deep past is largely recorded in small things: shells, leaves, tooth plates. Cabinets full of small, gorgeously textured fossils reward close looking and offer up a different pace than the drama of full-size skeletons. They are the background hum of the gallery’s larger narrative, quietly underscoring extinction, preservation bias and the truth that most species never grow to museum scale but are nevertheless essential for reconstructing ecosystems. The gallery thereby manages the difficult curatorial task of balancing spectacle with the granular evidence that is palaeontology’s foundation. Some of the museum is impossible to photograph due to the huge amounts of glare caused by all of that light and all of that glass!
A visit also offers abundant opportunities to reflect on the ethics and logistics of collections. Many of the specimens were gathered during colonial-era expeditions and international exchanges. The gallery’s labels sometimes hint at those contexts through place names and acquisition histories. Watching how the museum presents provenance (and how contemporary institutions like the MNHN are increasingly transparent about past collecting practices) is instructive. The gallery thus becomes a site not only for learning about extinct animals but also for contemplating the histories of science, including its entanglements with empire, trade, and early modern naturalist networks. In that way, the museum fits into larger conversations about restitution, ethical collecting and the responsibilities of public collections in a globalised world. This is again an important topic that too many people overlook, or may not even be aware of. If you want a first-hand account of this, read The Malay Archipelago by Alfred Russel Wallace, which is very open about collecting practices in the mid-1800s.
As a child, I was magnetically drawn to skeletons because they look like colossal puzzles and to the obvious drama of giant tusks and teeth (especially in dinosaurs). I feel that a place like this that was easily accessible to me could have changed my career trajectory. The importance of these educational materials and temporary exhibits, cannot be understated. They often provide the opportunity for more structured activities, but the core galleries themselves do a lot of work through sheer visual storytelling. The comparative displays, in particular, are fantastic for teaching the basics of anatomy and adaptation: a teacher or parent can point to a bone, a joint, a beak and tell a compact story of how that animal lived and breathed. The museum’s atmosphere (serious but welcoming, cerebral but visually accessible) is excellent for sparking a child’s curiosity about deep time. It was doing a great job of sparking interest in my inner child, and I came away with so many thoughts and ideas that I am glad I took as many photos as possible, as well as a notebook.
Serious naturalists and researchers will find the gallery’s holdings impressive for both depth and historical continuity. The MNHN has been a leading research institution for centuries, many important specimens and original descriptions of taxa are connected to the collections here. Researchers visiting the gallery can, with prior arrangements, dig into archival information, catalogues and specimen histories that are often co-located in the same institutional complex (I may have to find an excuse to go back to do this). The gallery thereby acts as a living bridge between public display and active research, it’s not just a showplace but a node in a continuing scientific conversation. That continuity, the sense that the same collections informed major 19th-century debates and still support 21st-century science, is one of the gallery’s most distinctive academic virtues. The aesthetics of the gallery also make it a photographer’s delight. The rhythmic repetition of ribs and vertebrae , the warm wood tones of the cases and the occasional splashes of red brick peeking through from outside create compositions that are both documentary and poetic. Photography is permitted for personal use in most areas, and many museum-goers take advantage of the forgiving natural light to capture details most other museums hide behind darker, LED-lit cases. If you enjoy photographing texture, line and form, allocate extra time; some of the gallery’s best visual stories are found in the close-up details of fossilised bone and the decorative carvings that frame the displays. As previously mentioned, just watch out for the glare!
No institution is without its limitations, and the gallery is candid about both space and interpretive constraints. The historic nature of the building and the density of the displays mean there’s sometimes limited room for the numbers of visitors that are attracted to the museum for the same reason I was. Visitors with mobility needs should check accessibility alternatives in advance, as the gallery’s layout, with upper floors and narrow aisles in places, can present challenges. Additionally, the museum’s traditional labelling approach, while historically rich, can be less immediately engaging for visitors accustomed to highly graphic, multimedia explanations. That said, these are not fatal flaws, rather they reflect a curatorial balance between conservation of heritage display styles and incremental modernisation. For many visitors, I suspect the trade-off is worth it because the gallery preserves an authentic museum experience that feels increasingly rare.
In addition to its dramatic array of skeletons, the Galerie de Paléontologie et d’Anatomie comparée also preserves a remarkable series of anatomical preparations of organs such as hearts, brains, lungs, and digestive systems, which are displayed in glass jars. These specimens, many prepared in the nineteenth century, were originally intended as teaching tools for medical students and naturalists, illustrating not only the structure of vital organs but also their variations across different animal groups. Walking along the displays, visitors can compare the complex folds of mammalian brains, the massive chambers of a whale’s heart, or the delicate branching of avian lungs, gaining a visceral sense of how anatomy underpins function. Although less theatrical than the towering skeletons, these preserved organs offer a more intimate look at the hidden machinery of life, highlighting both the ingenuity of scientific preparation and the continuity of biological form across species. They also underscore the gallery’s commitment to comparative study: by placing organs from diverse animals side by side, the exhibits reveal evolutionary patterns at the level of internal physiology, not just skeletal structure. If you’re a little squeamish, you may find this aspect of the museum a little unnerving.
Georges Cuvier (1769–1832) was one of the most influential figures in the history of natural science, and his legacy is closely tied to the collections now housed in the museum. Often called the ‘father of palaeontology’, Cuvier pioneered the comparative method in anatomy, using skeletal structures to identify species and to reconstruct the appearance and habits of extinct animals. His ground-breaking studies of fossil vertebrates in the Paris Basin provided some of the first concrete evidence that extinction was a real phenomenon, challenging prevailing views that all species created by God still existed somewhere on Earth. Cuvier’s meticulous work laid the foundation for vertebrate palaeontology as a discipline, and his insistence on careful anatomical comparison deeply influenced museum display practices that are still evident in the gallery today. Though he rejected evolutionary explanations in favor of his theory of successive catastrophes, his methods gave later scientists the tools to demonstrate evolution in action, making him a pivotal figure whose contributions shaped both the science and the public presentation of natural history.
The gallery’s relationship to the Jardin des Plantes and the broader MNHN complex is symbiotic. Located in the Latin Quarter near Austerlitz, the gallery is part of an ensemble of scientific and botanical sites that make a single day out in this quarter feel like a compact history of natural history itself. You can move from the gallery to greenhouses, the small zoo, the herbarium displays and other MNHN museums within walking distance; the whole cluster is exceptionally well suited for anyone interested in the history of science, ecology or natural history illustration. The physical proximity of living collections and fossil collections subtly reinforces a core lesson of the gallery: that life past and present are parts of the same story.
The galleries are most enjoyable at a slow pace, so allow a few hours rather than just a quick stop. Weekday mornings are typically quieter and better for lingering with specimens; weekends, especially during tourist season, can be busier. Languages on labels and guided materials are increasingly bilingual (French/English), but those who do not read French may want to pick up an English guide (available in the gift shop). The nearby cafes and the Jardin des Plantes itself offer pleasant spaces to decompress and discuss what you’ve seen, which is useful because the gallery’s dense displays reward conversation and slow digestion rather than a brisk, checklist approach. For anyone interested in the history of museums, the Galerie de Paléontologie et d’Anatomie comparée is itself a primary source. Its display furniture, casework, and labelling conventions are artefacts of museological practice: they show how earlier curators aimed to teach and how design aesthetics shaped those lessons. Studying the gallery as an institutional object is instructive for museum professionals. How do you preserve historical displays while updating them for accessibility and contemporary scientific understanding? The gallery’s answer is incremental, maintaining the historical fabric where it enhances interpretation, while introducing modern interpretive tools where clarity or ethics demand it. The result is an institution that is honest about its past while still committed to public education.
You do not leave with a single, glaring blockbuster memory (unless a particular specimen strikes you). Rather, you leave with a mosaic of images and memories, the geometry of vertebrae, the surprising similarity of limb bones across species, a label that suddenly links a fossil to an excavation in a distant field notebook. The experience rewards return visits and slow attention. For those who enjoy intellectual layering and the tactile pleasures of old museum furniture and historic cases, the gallery feels like a remarkably well-preserved and humane institution where science is presented in all its complexities. If the gallery has a contemporary mission it is to be a place where the long arc of life’s history can be told with nuance. The combination of comparative anatomy and palaeontology under one roof matters methodologically: by seeing bones of living and extinct species together, visitors grasp evolutionary continuity in a visceral way. It is a pedagogical approach that foregrounds physical evidence and comparative reasoning rather than flashy narratives. That may not fit every visitor’s taste in the age of immersive media, but it is precisely what gives the Galerie de Paléontologie et d’Anatomie comparée its enduring educational value.
In short, the Galerie de Paléontologie et d’Anatomie comparée is a museum for lingering. It is ideal for those who love the materiality of bones, the craft of historic museum presentation, and the slow unfolding of scientific narrative across centuries. The building’s architecture, the careful arrangement of comparative displays, and the richness of palaeontological specimens combine to create an experience that feels at once historic and urgently present, a reminder that museums are places where deep time and human curiosity meet. If you visit Paris with any interest in the history of life or the history of science, this gallery deserves an unhurried afternoon of your visit. It is certainly worth the cost of entry, and if you’re visiting multiple places within the Jardin des Plantes all at once, then you can get a discounted entry, from €12 entry to a reduced rate of €9. This is certainly worth it and I can’t wait to visit again in the future! If you’ve visited, what is your favourite memory of the museum?
If you liked this post and enjoy reading this blog, please consider supporting me on Patreon where you will also gain access to exclusive content. If you enjoy reading my blog, why not subscribe using the form below?
