Dear Authors,

The reviewers of your papers very raised serious issues about your work. I thank you very much for taking time to answer them point by point. Taking into account these comments will need a strong re-organization of the paper and an in-depth revision of the analysis. Nevertheless, I am open to receive a revised version of your manuscript, if you like to prepare one. Please note that this does not grant final acceptance. Your revised manuscript will undergo an additional round of review.

Your revised manuscript should take into account all the reviewer’s comments and must incorporate your answers to them. I am here pointing out some of these comments, although all of them are extremely important.
- All the reviewers are underlining a major issue with the language. I urge you to ask help from a native English speaker. Indeed, the poor quality of several sentences prevented the ready understanding properly your scientific message.
- Reading the reviewer’s comments, it appears that the purpose of your paper does not clearly pop up. I strongly suggest that you revise your presentation of the paper objectives and goals. In particular, I suggest that you strengthen the link between paleo-records and observations throughout the analysis.
- The numerical/statistical analysis of the data should be revised and explained in more detail. A special attention should be paid on the uncertainties, their measure and their interpretation in the framework of your data analysis. In your response, you identify several ways for improvement. Please, implement them. The references to the numerical tools must of course be included.
- All the elements in response to the 2k Special Issue Data Review Team must be included. It is also true for item 3.
- Don’t forget the new appendices and the revised tables.

As mentioned above, your revised manuscript (if you prepare one) will be submitted to reviewers for further advice.

The language should be improved.

Dear authors,

Thank you for your patience during this procedure. Please find hereafter the latest comments for your paper.

Please follow the recommendation from the data stewardship team:
Required: Expand the data availability section to explain that: Citations to the persistent identifiers for the original data used in this study are listed in Table S1.
Required: Add data citations or URLs to the original dataset for each of the records used in this study (Table S1). These can be found in version 2 of the global dataset (PAGES 2k Consortium, 2017, Scientific Data).
Required: Submit the primary outcome of this study, the composite time series by region (Fig. 2) to a public repository and include the Data Citation/URL in "Data Availability".

Please take into account all the minor comments from both reviewers

Please answer the comment from reviewer #2 and include it, as much as possible, in the revised paper.

All the best,

Dear authors
I thank you for having taken into account the reviewer's comments and revising your manuscript accordingly. I am happy to accept your paper for publication.