Hello,
I will avoid using heraldic terms, so the matter is easily understood.
In the figure, we see a yellow lion on a red field. This would be that particular knight's coat of arms, and what we see is one of several ways it could be displayed, in this case, on the jupon (surcoat). If the knight carried a shield, these arms would be seen on it, too. The crested and mantled helm, as seen on the banner, (see below) are separate elements, and would not be displayed on the surcoat or shield.
Then, to the standard. Besides the coat of arms, on a shield, we see other heraldic elements, like the helmet with crest and mantling. The helmet does not need to be actually like the one the knight used (although usually conformed to contemporary models), it is just a base for the crest, in this case a gold lion (in heraldry, gold and yellow refer to the same colour - or). The crest, more often than not, had no relationship with the designs on the coat of arms; on this particular case, it coincides with what the knight wears: a or lion.
But the shield has a black lion on a golden field - so, this is a different coat of arms to the one the figure wears. The colours are different, then it is a different coat of arms, presumably belonging to different persons. BTW, this shield's shape need not coincide with the one our man would really use; there were many different shapes, generally related to specific periods.
Hence my question about it.
Surely Ernesto will provide some additional information later on, including the identity (identities) we are discussing about.
Dani
