General comments：

The study investigates the Chongzhen Drought (1627-1644 CE), one of the most severe droughts in central and eastern China in the last 1500 years. By extracting records from Chinese historical documents, spatial patterns and temporal series of drought and famine are reconstructed respectively to reveal the spatio-temporal progression of the drought and its impact on famine. The regional differences and the phase divisions of the drought and the dominant pathway from drought to famine are analyzed then. This research can enhance our comprehension of historical climatic extremes and their societal consequences. The manuscript is well-organized, logically sound and clearly written.

Specific comments:

Line 39-49: I understand that the authors intend to begin with the topic of famine and subsequently introduce drought as one of its primary causes. However, in my view, the second paragraph of the introduction would benefit from a more detailed discussion of drought, especially since the first paragraph focuses solely on climate change. A logical progression from climate change to drought and then to famine would seem to flow more naturally and align more coherently with the subsequent narratives.

Line 46: It would be beneficial to clearly mark the corresponding periods of the late Eastern Han, Western Jin, late Sui, late Tang, late Ming, and late Qing dynasties in order to assist readers unfamiliar with Chinese history in understanding the context. The same applies to line 51.

Figure 1: The figure contains a mix of historical and modern geographical concepts, potentially leading to confusion. For instance, under contemporary geographical categorizations, Shanxi Province is not typically considered part of the northwest region, nor is Henan part of the North China region, and Hunan is not included in the Southeast region, among others. It might be clarifying to substitute "Northwest China" with "Northwest region" and "North China" with "Northern region." The former terms are commonly employed in the delineation of modern China's geographical divisions: East China, South China, North China, Central China, Southwest China, Northwest China, and Northeast China.

Table 1: I have the following three types of questions:

(1)The translation of Chinese expression “崇祯十年旱” should be "Drought in the tenth year of Chongzhen period" which is analogous to the expression "Drought in the third year of Chongzhen period (崇祯三年旱)". Given this similarity, both records should be classified at the same level. However, in Table 1, the former is classified as level 3, while the latter is classified as level 2.

(2)The expression of "Drought in the third year of Chongzhen period (崇祯三年旱)" means "There is a drought in a specific year". "Winter drought (冬旱)" is also a situation in which drought occurs in a given year. From this perspective, the two records should be classified at the same level. However, in Table 1, the former is classified as level 2 and the latter is classified as level 1.

(3) How should readers interpret and compare different types of drought expressions? For instance, why is the drought level of ‘Drying up of wells’ classified as Level 3 in Table 1, which is higher than that of ‘The grass and trees are withered and scorched’, classified as Level 2?

It is recommended to provide more detailed descriptions on how to classify the original records using the semantic difference method. This would assist readers in achieving similar classification results with the same data. The authors could consider categorizing all descriptions into groups such as drought descriptions, plant descriptions, and descriptions of rivers, wells, and groundwater. Subsequently, they could summarize the text descriptions within each category and classify them into levels 1-4. The same approach could be applied to Table 2.

Line 149: Readers unfamiliar with China may not know the locations of the Wei River, Fen River, and Guanzhong Plain. The same applies to Line 189, where the locations of Changsha, Hexi Corridor, Fen and Zhang Rivers in Shanxi, Wen and Si Rivers in Shandong, Baiyangdian, Suzhou Creek, etc., have not been introduced in the article.

Figure 2a: What distinguishes a Drought Zone from a Severe Drought Zone? What criteria are used to classify areas into Drought Zones and Severe Drought Zones? Is it the case that areas experiencing level 1-2 drought events are classified as Drought Zones, while areas experiencing level 3-4 drought events are classified as Severe Drought Zones? The same question applies to the classifications in Figure 4a..

Figure 2b: I have the following two suggestions.

(1) By converting the ordinates to the same scale, the changes and differences in the DKDI index across each region can be displayed more intuitively. For example, it can be unified into a range from 0 to 1 with an interval of 0.1.

(2) The expression of the start and end time of each stage in the figure is different from the text content. Taking the "Starting Phase" as an example, the start time seems to be someday before 1627 and the end time seems to be someday after 1633 from the figure.

Line 160-170: The changes of DKDI in the southeast and southwest regions are not mentioned in this paragraph.

Line 171: It is recommended to provide more details on how the four phases of the drought were determined by analyzing the temporal and spatial variations of the drought.

Line 190: This line implies that the Yellow River once flowed through Jiangsu Province. But as we can see from Figure 1, the Yellow River does not flow through Jiangsu Province. This discrepancy is due to Figure 1 representing the modern course of the Yellow River, which has historically changed its course. This statement could potentially cause confusion among readers and therefore necessitates additional clarification.

Figure 4b: Can it be divided into distinct phases like drought? If not, the phases of drought are suggested to be re-marked on the chart for easier comparison.

Table 4: What is the correlation coefficient in the fourth year? If we want to draw conclusions that affect three years, shouldn’t we at least list the correlation coefficient for the fourth year?

Line 302: Do these 15 response types occur exclusively in the Yangtze-Huai Region, or are similar patterns observed in other regions as well?

Technical corrections:

Line 139: Formulas need to be numbered.

Figure 3: The graticules appear to be missing from the figure. The same issue is observed in Figure 6.

Figure 4: Typically, figures are not placed directly beneath the title.

Table 6: This table should be reformatted into a three-line table.

Figure 7: The figure is note cited in the text.

The severe drought during the reign of Chongzhen, the last emperor of the Ming Dynasty, has been widely acknowledged in academic circles as a significant factor contributing to the dynasty's downfall. Nonetheless, despite extensive research on this extreme event, numerous questions remain unanswered. Of particular interest is the precise role that climatic anomalies - such as temperature decreases and droughts - played among the myriad factors leading to the Ming Dynasty's collapse. This dissertation utilizes information extracted from historical records to reconstruct the spatiotemporal patterns of drought and the kernel density index of drought, as well as the spatiotemporal progression of famine. Regression analysis reveals that drought contributed to the famine to the extent of 67.3%, with some regions exceeding 70%. Furthermore, it elucidates the dominant pathway of climate impact transmission: extreme drought → decreased agricultural yields → food shortages → famine. The paper provides a clearer understanding of the severity and mechanisms of social impact caused by the late Ming drought, thereby advancing research into the societal consequences of extreme climatic events. In summary, the thesis is characterized by comprehensive data, sound methodology, compelling arguments, reliable conclusions, and coherent writing, rendering it a commendable piece of scholarship.

A few points require attention:

1. In the discussion section, the analysis of the impact of other factors on the famine appears somewhat superficial. It could be augmented by considering the "Three Extra Levies" (special taxes imposed for military expenses – the Liao levy: imposed in response to the war with Manchuria——later the Qing dynasty, Suppression levy: imposed in response to large-scale peasant uprisings, and Training levy: imposed for the training of new armies), which intensified the burden on peasants and influenced the famine.
2. In Figure 1, important locations mentioned in the text should be marked on the map to facilitate reader comprehension. Examples include Guanzhong and the Weihe River.
3. In Figure 3, the first two small graphs require certain modifications. The maps for 1633 and 1636 should illustrate the average drought index during the initial phase (1627-1633) and the developmental phase (1634-1637) mentioned in the text, for clearer presentation.

Manuscript CP-2024-11 is excellent in terms of scientific contribution, scientific quality and is clearly written. The discussion and explanations are clear, well developped and of high quality, while providing a new, solidly substantiated contribution to the question of the relationship between climatic extremes and their societal consequences. The study examines the transmission of severe drought impacts by a systemic approach to reflect the complexity of their societal consequences. This work absolutely deserves to be published.

1/ General questions:

Insofar as famine does not affect all regions at the same time, aren't subsistence crises partly “exchange-soluble”? In other words, are there attempts (by local or central government, farmers...) to alleviate famines - on a large or small scale - through massive imports from other regions, through trade between upstream and downstream regions, or through smuggling? Similarly, is there any legislation against trade in times of crisis?

Table 6 (line 8) shows food distributions (also mentioned on line 306): do local governments own granaries to prevent food crises (which presupposes purchases and infrastructure) or do they legally take control of the trade and grain stored by rural communities?

2/ Specific questions:

In table 6, line 15, “Praying for rain”: is this a political and religious initiative, or just an individual and local one? Are there any general incentives that might underline the level of social stress?

The authors mentioned “cannibalism” in Table 2 and Table 6 and state at line 317 that “Severe famine swept through the region, and there were even instances of cannibalism.” Are these extreme cases sufficiently well-documented and numerous to be used in the classification scale of famine levels and response measures, or are they local epiphenomena?

As RC2 pointed out, important locations mentioned in the text should be marked on the map (Figure 1) to facilitate reader comprehension.