It is well known that research quality notions vary across research fields. Despite this, humanities quality notions are often portrayed as deviant or particularly hard to grasp. To some extent, this has a historical explanation, as notions from within the humanities have not been the standards used in the development of research evaluation tools. Accordingly, we argue that current discussions on research evaluation and quality notions reflect a lack of understanding of how field-type quality notions in the humanities can be studied. We therefore identify entry points to further studies on how humanities scholars address quality notions in their own words, what one might call 'quality from within'. The suggested entry points are assessment for recruitment, field-type internal evaluations, public debates on the humanities, book reviews, the academic seminar, PhD supervision, academic memoirs, obituaries and the "Festschrift." We here outline how an empirically grounded research agenda around quality in humanities research can be fruitfully pursued. Thus, the study aims to contribute insights into why and how a fresh perspective can provide us with much-needed entry points to understanding quality from within.