Disclaimer: I'm not really a fan of Tolkien, so don't weigh my opinion too heavily, but I think the text doesn't add anything, so I'd leave it out. (If you do include it, maybe go with a slightly more readable font though.)
Many people have tried, but to the best of my knowledge, nobody has found a perfect, fit-for-all-maps bonus-value formula yet. Having said that, in general the smallest bonus workable bonus is three or four territories and worth one or (maybe!) two armies.
It's not only about the number of territories; defensibility is also important. Just think about the old Risk board: Australia (and to a lesser degree South-America) are very easy to defend: just hold one (or, for SA, two) territories and you're good. Asia on the other hand is very difficult to hold, since it has so many territories bordering on other bonuses. In your case, `The Far South` is just like a seven-territory Australia. `Rushok Area` is also seven territories, but six of those can be directly attacked from neighbouring bonuses. So, `Rushok Area` should be worth more than `The Far South`.
I see you have used two "layers" of bonuses. When assigning a value for the "super bonuses", keep in mind that any player who gets that bonus *must* also hold all the "sub-bonuses". So, while it may look weird, having a super-bonus be worth just a few armies (maybe even less than the value of its biggest sub-bonus) is perfectly okay. (If you make your super-bonuses worth the sum of their sub-bonuses plus a little extra, the first player to complete a super-bonus is extremely likely to win the game without too much more effort.)
Oh, and below `Prancing Pony` you have an `Unnamed` territory. There's another one two territories to the West, just below the bonus link for `East March`. A while ago I thought of a way to easily hunt down territories which you've forgotten to name, see the third post on [this page](http://warlight.net/Forum/Thread.aspx?ThreadID=2917&Offset=20