We are all aware of the archetypal "Absent-Minded Professor" -Einsteinean hair, brilliant thinker, scatter-brained, doesn't know his glasses are on his face, horrible at paying bills, messy office etc.
I was thinking about this a few minutes ago...
Different sections of our brains have different functions -this is not disputed.
Tests show that if one part of a brain gets damaged, other parts will often begin taking over the role of the damaged part.
Our brains are very dynamic.

I was wondering if there is any evidence that suggests that the more intelligent someone is -intelligent as in a greater than avearge capacity for analytical reason and abstract thought- the less capacity they have for short-term memory.
Is the archetype accurate, or just a false construct?

If it is correct, is there a physical correlation?
Are the areas/functions of the brain normally devoted to short and long term memory "taken over" by the functions of analytical reason?

Just a thought.

I don't think that there is an inverse correlation between memory and analytical abilities. In fact most of the more brilliant scientists I know have an outstanding memory. However, it is more selective. They memorize stuff very quick and remember it for a long time if necessary, but almost exclusively if it is connected to work. I observe the same thing with me and as I am surely not brilliant I rather believe that the absent-mindedness is rather due to the focus on one's work.
Brilliant thinkers (or thinkers in general) are often that brilliant because they devote a lot of time thinking about their work. Thus they appear absent-minded with regards to every-day functions.

it may come down to just how specialised and devoted a persons thoughts are. Only the things that fit in with that devotion are remembered properly...

They don't have bad memories: it's just that they're so incredibly absorbed in their work that everything else takes a serious backseat and therefore tends to get overlooked.