Hulme to solve the problem by declaring, in 1962, that 'ovator' must be the right word and has 'a meaning central to the passage'.
However, when Miss Hulme tried to find 'ovator' in Latin dictionaries in Shakespeare's lifetime, she failed, and fell back on the theory that the word was 'no more than a schoolmaster's invention to serve in school-boys' "themes"'.
As for 'ovator' in early dictionaries, Philip Brockbank, who edited Coriolanus for the Arden series in 1976, found the word in Rider's 1611 Latin dictionary, but meaning only 'he that reioyceth'.
Unfortunately, Thomas did not offer a page reference, and one combs in vain the twenty books of the Attic Nights for 'ovator'.
(Some said that the ovator entered Rome on horseback; Masurius Sabinus claimed that orators entered on foot, followed not by their soldiers, but by the senate in a body.)
(But not for a Triumph, reserved for taking in a province.) In the event, Shakespeare did not make Coriolanus' entry into Rome an Ovation; the reference to 'ovator' is merely a local touch, not followed up; indeed, the play's Romanness is an intermittent matter throughout.
If we read Martius' outburst against the misuse of martial music with emphasis on 'him', we can agree with Hilda Hulme: Martius is himself the 'ovator' to whom he alludes.