He's no idiot: Dostoyevsky's Prince Myshkin

I kind of wonder about Dostoyevsky's title, "The Idiot." Would love to hear from someone who knows Russian - but - the title seems wrong to me. No doubt that, in English, it's a great title - mysterious, provocative, eye-catching, memorable. But is Prince Myshkin really in any way an "idiot" in the sense, mostly derogatory, in which we actually use the term in English: idiot is somewhat like a playground taunt, a derogatory term aimed at someone who behaves stupidly in a comic, bumbling way. It also has a less acceptable use as a derogatory term for someone with severe retardation. More broadly, it can describe someone who's stupid, ill informed, or incompetent in some specific field: I'm an idiot when it comes to math, e.g. Prince Myshkin fits none of these (partly, that's D's point, I get it) - but his behavior, in the first few chapters anyway, wouldn't elicit the term "idiot," at least not today. Perhaps: simpleton, though that's a very old-fashioned term. Mostly, he's just a weirdo - his behavior is odd, not quite fitting the social norms, but he seems intelligent if socially awkward. For example, he gets off the train to Petersburg and the first thing he does is visit General Epanchin because the General's wife may be a distant relation - even though he knows that she ignored a letter he'd written to her some years back. (D. doesn't preserve the letter, but it must have been very odd - the servant remembers it.) He talks his way into seeing the general, more or less awkwardly planting himself at the elbow of the secretary and asking some odd questions about where he can go to smoke. When he sees the general, he fully confesses that he has nowhere to stay, that he's carrying all his belongings with him - but he has not the slightest sense that this behavior is socially inappropriate and a real imposition. Fortunately for him, the general is sympathetic - but he cannot process that the right thing to do would have been to get a place to stay, and then pay the visit (of course he has no money, but he doesn't even seem to see this as a problem or issue). In other words, he has some kind of behavior disorder, maybe a form of autism?, along with his epilepsy - but he's intelligent and expresses deep thoughts and feelings of empathy - note his moving disquisition on capital punishment and his thoughts on the fears that a condemned man must experience. So, no, he's not in any sense an idiot - that's clear - but I wonder if anyone would actually see him or describe him as such. Good title - but it steers us in the wrong direction as we try to get a bead on Myshkin's character.