The figure of Orpheus has long exercised a potent influence on religious thought. Yet what we know directly about Orphism comes from a scatter of isolated and often very short fragments quoted in the works of Platonists of the Roman period, notably Proclus, Damascius and Olympiodorus. The author’s concern here is to establish the context in which these passages were cited, and to trace the development of the written tradition, from the texts which contain a critique of the beliefs of the Homeric era to those, whether newly composed or transformed, which show signs of adaptation to later religious and philosophical movements, among them Stoicism and Platonism. In sharp contrast to views held by others, it is argued that it is possible to map out a process of evolution, amongst other criteria by focusing on the role and place of Chronos in the Orphic theogony. The author also asks whether there really ever existed true Orphic sects with a cult with specific rites, and would conclude that the present evidence cannot be held to substantiate this. Orphee a pendant longtemps exerce une puissante influence sur la pensee religieuse. Cependant, ce que nous connaissons directement de l'OrphA-sme se reduit A une poignee de fragments isoles et souvent tres courts qui se trouvent eparpilles dans les oeuvres de Platoniciens ayant vecu sous l'Empire romain, surtout Proclus, Damascius et Olympiodore. Dans les articles qui composent ce recueil, l'auteur s'est attache A reconstituer les contextes dans lesquels ces passages sont cites, et A comprendre comment s'est developpee la tradition ecrite A laquelle ils appartiennent, depuis les textes qui critiquent les croyances vehiculees par Homere et par Hesiode et qui, ayant fait l'objet d'une redaction ou d'une transformation recente, presentent les signes d'une adaptation A des mouvements religieux ou philosophiques tardifs, le StoA-cisme et le medio-Platonisme entre autres. S'opposant en cela A b