Oh, Examples Are Important, eh?

In chapter IV of Book XII, Quintilian explains that the use of examples is paramount for a good speaker:

But an orator ought to be furnished, above all things, with an ample store of examples, as well ancient as modern; since he should not only be acquainted with matters which are recorded in history, or transmitted from hand to hand as it were by tradition, or of daily occurrence, but should not even be neglectful of the fictions of the more eminent poets (page 423-424). 

I find this interesting, not because the idea is unique, but because Quintilian used the phrase, "above all things." This seems to insinuate that the use of examples is the most important aspect of oratory. Is this true? If so, it must be applicable across the entire spectrum, including but not limited to: forensic, deliberative, and epideictic speech; and within the uses of pathos, logos, and ethos. It is a strong claim, but why does Quintilian say an orator must "be furnished, above all things, with an ample store of examples?"

 I do not believe this question was sufficiently answered by Quintilian and it seems odd that with such a powerful claim the chapter is one of the shortest in Book XII. For most rhetoricians, the topics they view as most important are the ones they never shut up about: Cicero and pathos, democrats and the environment, republicans and Benghazi, etc. Though each of these are important and should not be disregarded, they portray this point: that whatever the topic of choice, there is much to say on the subject. Why is it that Quintilian simply mentions the use of examples without any expansion or any use of examples!?

Don't get me wrong, I find Quintilian very interesting and very informative; but he do not feel he displayed his abilities as a rhetorician within this short chapter.