Dear authors,

I have gone through the revised version of your paper, and appreciate the changes that were made in the text. Particularly, the changes made to the methods are useful, and improved the logical flow of the manuscript.

Before acceptation, there are several minor issues that need your attention.

(1) The methods now include the basics of the morphometric analyses, and the geomorphic transport laws that were used to derive the sediment fluxes (here, E*). You have added two equations at the beginning of the section (3.1.1.). I feel that a few sentences need to be inserted, so that the readers can easily grasp the logic flow of the section and the sequence of the equations. For example the link between the first two equations (Eq 1 and 2) and the remaining part of the section (Eq. 4) is not entirely clear to me. Also, note that you express in Eq. 2 Qs as a nonlinear function of the hillslope gradient, then argue for a linear relationship (L181), and then again use the Sc (critical hillslope gradient) in the remaining equations suggesting that you have non-linear behaviour. The text would be easier to follow if you insert a few lines of text between the equations. Also, check that you use systematically the same annotations. The combination of continuity equations (dQs/dx, expressed as a function of E) and z(x) is confusing.

(2) The relationship between the denudation rates that were measured on the hilltops and the curvature is not straightforward. Figure 12A illustrates this issue, with a large scatter in the denudation rates for the range of hilltop curvatures. Even if you exclude the "P" sample, do you have a significant relationship between the two variables? Which variable (beyond curvature) is explaining the increase in denudation rates that you observe along the transect? Can you elaborate on the variability of the denudation rates in the text of the discussion? Is there possibly a sampling bias (1 clast or amalgamation of clasts? shielding?)?

Beyond these two comments, I have minor editorial comments
L134: What do you mean with “passive” benchmark.
L134: tilting
L135: I would delete “recent”
L155-161: The argumentation on the transport-limited system is a bit confusing.
L208: hillslope
L185: Can you clarify the definition of LH? Is LH, the maximum hillslope length?
L191: In Eq. 7, isn’t there a Er value missing in the right term?
L225: Can you write the full equation? In the short version, you have written only dz in the left term, and dx in the right term.
L228: In Eq. 12, you write z(x) and z(xb), while in previous equations, you have used the abbreviated form and have written “z”. Please check for consistency.
L288 and following: Can you include the units of the measures of hillslope gradients?
L292: Why do you refer to “highly mobile conglomerate-derived class”? What is the size of the clasts? And what is the diffusive process responsible for mobilisation of the clasts along slope?
L306: The reference value of 0.25 is lower than what is commonly observed in literature for steady-state profiles? Typically, values are closer to 0.40 - 0.50. Why do you observe values of 0.25?
L329: Please rephrase “CHT undergoing a 2-fold increase from 7 to 10 km”. Can you state from W to E?
L367: Can you add the units here for Sc (m/m)?
L368: What do you mean with “indicating possible decaying dynamics of the landscape”?
L369: appear
L367-373: This section - where the authors argue that the R* vs. E* relationship could point to change in climatic boundary conditions along the transect - seems to be contradiction with the statements made on L328-338 of “homogeneity of geological, climatic and biological properties over the transect”. Can you clarify your statement (L367-373)?
L508-510: Here, you link the different denudation rates of the hilltop positions with the rock uplift rate patterns. How do you calculate the “implied slope rate of 20 mm/ka” from the differences in the denudation rates measured at the hilltop positions? What is the uncertainty on the derivation of the slip rates? Which assumptions are you using to derive slip rates based on surface denudation rates?
L527: delete “globally”
L529: Can you rephrase “between the two ends of the profile”?

Figure 2: In Figure 2, the authors map the travel times to the top of the Oxfordian marls. The link between the text (introduction to the study area) and the figure caption is not entirely clear. Can you introduce this information in the description of the study area? Can you explicitly mention why and how you use this information on the top of the basement in you study (for example L360 and following)?

Dear authors,

The revised paper addresses well the last round of comments. I am happy to see your work on hilltop denudation rates and uplift gradients published.