Both reviewers appreciated your manuscript but suggested numerous changes. I value your thorough responses to all comments and invite you to submit a revised version.

Thank you for your revised version. I am happy with most of your changes and agree with the clarifications. During my read, I found minor issues. Firstly, I know that pollen is only a supplementary proxy, but you discuss it and use it in the supplementary RDA analysis. In the methods, there is only a mention that pollen was analysed at a certain resolution. Did I understand correctly that pollen was re-used from previous studies? In such a case, you should refer to the pollen analysis details in these. If otherwise, it requires further description, either in methods or in the supplementary.

Secondly, as one referee suggested, I still believe the introduction could be shortened. The last paragraph reads mostly like methods and distracts the reader. Could you reduce that and move the descriptive parts to methods?

Thank you for your contribution!