Edward,
thanks for your responce. actually, I was able to find that Hill was actually staying in Petersburg at the "Venable Cottage" along the Boydon Plank Road on the Confederate line. pretty much in the area of what we now know as the "Break out" It was his Headquarters for the corps. Thats what makes interpreting the image difficult. while he was "there" on the front line, he was also sick and in furlough. his wife and kids were with him also and he was known to frequent friends in the area. so he came and went as he pleased. so, when interpreting the image some have always felt that he should have been armed or looking "always ready for battle" where as I have always maintained that according to historical accounts this is exactly what he did look like ready for battle. absent the side arm of course. but we all know the armies in camps during the winter months werent carrying their weapons every moment because very little fighting was going on during the winter months. the current discussion regarding the horse becomes critical because I know nothing about horses. I had always placed the date of the image to march of 65 due to the way the man and boy are dressed (not in overcoats) and it has to be after the fall of 64 when the last known image of Hill was taken and he is still shown with a full beard. and we know he was killed on April 2nd. so thats why RD is checking on the "coat" of the horse. information I had received indicated the horse has a summer coat or at least already lost the winter coat. RD, seems to think thats plausable that men would remove the coat as soon as possible to avoid hurting the horse when wearing a saddle. so he's checking on could that happen in March in the Richmond area? as you indicated, Hill's horse wold have been well cared for. which was another point of contention, some felt this horse is unkempt. but RD didnt feel, it looks too bad or at least out of context knowing that the horse is on the line.
hope this helps and thanks for the comments. Sam