Is Wikipedia mistaken? It feels illogical for the Rhodesian Army to have Lieutenant and Major Generals, but no General?
History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
The Rhodesian Army was small: too small to justify anyone holding the rank of General. They didn't have enough troops to form a General's command, which is usually a full Army or Army Group.
This is perfectly normal for small countries. The Vatican City military, the Swiss Guard, has a highest rank of Colonel, but with only 135 men, it's really a Captain's command.