The OP didn't say what the editor's decision was but if not reject, then whether it's R&R, accept with revision or accept with correction will give a sense of how much the editor agrees with the critical review. If it's R&R then you really need to engage with the criticism not just dismiss it. This might be a moment where sharing the reviews with an experienced person in your field is a good idea - someone like your supervisor can probably help you to work out what needs addressing and what can be left.
If the journal has rejected it, you need to think whether a) there really are some flaws that need fixing, or if not fixable, mean a lower ranked journal might be more appropriate b) whether you made a poor choice of journal e.g. somewhere that doesn't really publish articles in this theoretical / methodological vein.
What I would advise against doing (having heard some awful tales at conferences recently) is the entitled postgrad act - i.e. refusing to accept the editor's decision, resubmitting a basically unchanged article after a R&R with the comment that the reviewer is an idiot etc. It really does not get you anywhere.

I know someone who did/does researchers into schools (currently in NQT year but it seems that the programme is 2 or 3 years). The positive from his perspective was that the participating schools saw the added value of the scheme for their students and so actively used his research/university experience - he felt valued from the start. Some teachers can be a bit prejudiced against people with PhDs - you only have to look at the TES fora to see that, and at least with that scheme you know you're not going to be dealing with that sort of rubbish. I think the attraction of it would depend though on whether you just want to teach or whether you are interested in the extra things that programme offers.

I don't know if you realise but external examiners get paid very little (usually c. £150 and then taxed as a second income at 50% i.e. a lot less than minimum wage given the time commitment) for examining. Your supervisor will be thinking therefore who has the expertise and a) owes me a favour and might therefore shoulder the extra work to examine my student and b) who is known as a decent and fair person. The person who looks great on paper might be known as not being very nice in real life. Your university may also have specific requirements for an examiner i.e. number of years of experience, employed at research intensive university, based in the UK to cut expenses etc.
And Butterfly's right - don't ask people (especially strangers) to be your external - it will send a signal that you don't know how the system works or possibly even worse that you're trying to fix the examination process. That's not the professional reputation you want!

try the education pages of the French embassy website in your home country. Any special grants for your nationality usually get listed there eg the Entente Cordiale ones for UK students.

I only know about Marie Curie fellowships as I had one - it takes a couple of months to put the very complex application together (so you need real commitment from the academic in Berlin as it requires a lot from her too) and then it takes 6-7 months to hear. The last time I looked success rates were c.8%. I think you'd need the 3 1st author publications to be out to stand a chance if I'm brutally honest, but you could try doing a search for neuroscience and Marie Curie and see if you can find people who have been successful in your field and what their cvs look like.

I think you're right to make the choice you are doing. If you've not been at a research-intensive university for the PhD, it would probably good to experience it as a postdoc to get a sense about whether teaching or research intensive universities are ideally where you would like to work. A postdoc will also give you time to publish and get a solid start to that bit of your cv whereas I know a couple of people who went into teaching-heavy posts, who've never managed to do that, which significantly limits future options.

Is the PhD offer from the US? If it is there's normally a point where you can opt out with a Masters if you decide that an academic career isn't for you, so you might be able to have the best of both worlds. It would be worth checking anyway. The academic job market for Politics PhDs is horrendous, and unlikely to improve, so pick your research topic carefully if you do want academia and keep contacts open for a non-academic plan B.

Google culture shock. You are probably at the worst point in the cycle for hating a new location. If it's N Europe the winter is no doubt also getting you down - might it be worth hanging on a bit longer to see whether it all feels better in sunshine? Also travel - if you're not going to stick it out, there are probably things in this country that you want to see before leaving - make plans to visit. You might find that having weekend plans that don't depend on other people makes you feel better too. If it's by any chance Germany you're in, the locals do warm up but it takes about a year - then they are much more friendly.
Only you can tell whether career or location matters most to you but if it's location then reassess doing a PhD (especially a self-funded one)) - the trouble with a humanities PhD is that you rarely get to choose where you live if you go into academia.

had heard the humanities departments in Germany were still far from meritocratic in their hiring processes but hadn't realised the patronage problem was still that bad. It's got a bit better in the social sciences. What you are trying to do sounds less insane if your only real chance is in this particular department. I know Switzerland now offers good graduate school training but are you sure about Austria? I know of two acquaintances who've recently gained PhDs while living in different countries entirely - one never even met the 'supervisor'.

On what this UK university has told you - what they are offering sounds so dodgy that I would strongly advise checking whether it is accredited in the UK. There are some very dubious outfits around, some of which have credible websites, but if the 'PhD' is actually awarded by a dubious US private college, as is sometimes the case, it's very unlikely to be recognised in Germany subsequently. PhDs by publication normally require a series of proper double blind peer reviewed journal articles in journal with decent impact factors - a process which would take usually longer than a year given the slow review times in many humanities journals, and I really would be surprised if they were allowed to be in German because then the university couldn't guarantee the integrity of the exam process.

TreeofLife is right on this. The UK is not like Germany and there are multiple checks and balances built into the system which would make want you want to do next to impossible. Any supervisor who couldn't see the progress of the actual research is going to be very suspicious about whether its your own work (and the multiple plagiarism scandals in German PhDs have been widely reported here). You are not allowed to have had substantial contact with your external examiner, so again TofL is correct to say he/she couldn't be the external.

Wouldn't it be easier just to go to Austria? They seem to accept PhDs without attendance or lengthy registrations and you wouldn't need to translate it then either. Or given how much regulations vary between the Laender are you sure there are no German universities that would allow you to do what you want in terms of a habil?

PS A more UK-centric site on leaving academia is: http://jobsontoast.com/ it might be worth a browse for ideas.

I think if you really loathe such an important part of being a lecturer then leave sooner rather than later. I think Business School students are often a very difficult audience - lower standards of English seem to be tolerated and you have more students than most subjects do, who are doing the degree for employability rather than real interest. The combination for you given what you say about your personality must be tough. I think there are ways for people who struggle with teaching to become better teachers, but if you don't like it at all, then it is probably the wrong job. You have a long way until retirement - don't settle for being unhappy for decades.
I'm guessing from your age that you haven't had a proper job before - I just wanted to say that there are genuinely interesting ones out there. There are many aspects of my old civil service job that beat academia for one thing.

Anz07 - very glad to hear from you and that you're as ok (apart from flu) as you possibly could be in the circumstances. I seriously hope at least one head rolls in that admin office over this - that's just unbelievably incompetent.

Knowing whether or not you need a lab and /or expensive equipment would help people answer.

You will really need to get a distinction or strong merit in the MA to have a chance of getting on a PhD (my university is only allowed to accept a student with a 2:2 for a PhD in humanities / social sciences if the dean gives special permission and I doubt we are that unusual). I assume from your statement about your research talent that you got a good first for your dissertation - that will help, but you'd also need a consistently strong MA performance. I'm afraid even then getting funding is unlikely given the sheer level of competition for a small amount of history studentships. I would not advise self-funding a PhD unless you are independently wealthy, or are supported by someone with a higher than average income, and money is really not something you will ever need to earn for the 3-4 years. Think very carefully about why you want to do a PhD and what alternative ways of scratching that research itch more cheaply there might be. If you aren't already aware very few PhDs in history will get a lectureship so you need to be very aware about whether a PhD would actually help you at all in your career aims.